Good Actions Are Guards Against The Blow Of Adversity

"Good actions are a guard against the blows of adversity."

therefore we need to stop every time we hear an argument that is already lost because the statements are so bad. I’ve done it before. Then I remember that the point of studying for a debate in college was to strengthen my skills in the logic that would allow me to engage the argument with stronger arguments to the point that the debate doesn’t get argued back and becomes a discussion that works instead of a debate that goes in circles. It is unfortunate that some of us do not have time for the practices and reasoning skills to prove ourselves in the argument of the debate that we find ourselves in, but rather would rather pick up an argument where the points are solid and not going to collapse. Instead, if we have a solid grasp of the reasoning skills and have the intuition to know what we are arguing against in the first place, we have a chance to show how good we are and perhaps push the argument into what would be a strong discussion rather than a argument that loses.

It is unfortunate that we see so many parents that are either too weak to hear the arguments and look for a way to negate the arguments, or the parents who, just like some of us, do not look for arguments to show how good they are and defend their actions against the responses of the critiques of their actions. Either way, it is our responsibility to strengthen our reasoning skills and make sure we don’t get into debates like the one that is so common today. That would be a good day for us.

Endnotes

1 Even though a quick look at the debates shows that many were not as bad as the judgemental judgements. In some cases, the criticism was valid. Such debates ended because the parents of the parents would tell the children that they had to stop seeing each other. A parent cannot think he can keep an argument going with a child after telling the child to stop seeing the other parent.

2 This was probably one of the best rules of judging by the German judges.

3 In the future, this would probably not happen.

4 This judgment would probably be best to apply to less educated people and different situations than judging arguments in philosophy.

5 We could probably say that we have access to more cognitive situations when we are in the less educated environment than people who are still in their cognitive environments but have been elevated up to the better level of cognition.

6 In the past, most of us would see that good actions would outweigh the judgmental judgements. But now, we see more judgmental judgements than good actions.

7 Not everyone sees situations in the same way. We have the same natural desires for good things. It is more up to us to make good judgments and choose good actions, when we have the cognitive strength to do so. Even though, we do not see the situations as a competition with other people, they are.

8 Perhaps this applies to life more than debating.

9 Even though the situation is still up to the judgmental judgements, in a situation that is reasonable, we should not respond to the judgmental judgements, but rather we should see the judgmental judgements as things that would help us get more knowledge about situations.

10 It is a good practice to ask ourselves how we can argue in situations that are already decided.

11 Even if it would be good to argue some situations more than others, a good argument will still carry some weight.

12 In that same way, we have to see good judgements, and good arguments and make good judgements. It would be best to see good arguments and judgment and make good judgements that result in good situations. In other words, it would be best for us to make good judgments and good arguments that would get us into a good situation.

13 It is not a good time for a judgemental judgement that will not make the situation better.

14 We should see good judgment and good arguments and judge the situation and make the best judgments.