Good question. Not easily answered. Good thing is I already did in a few other OP's. The conversation I'm having is also interesting in those I believe.
This is about sourcing
This one I can't quote for some reason but it directly answers your question.
My main motivation to be here is to get as close to the "truth" as I can. What I mean by that is testing myself to see how close my opinions are to reality. To learn, and hopefully become a better person. Realizing full well that I am a narcissist and as such by definition think I'm perfect.
To do this I question myself first and foremost, and when I talk to someone I follow some very basic rules for how I do it.
-I try to avoid fallacious arguments. There are many, some of them are hard to spot, and I'm not always successful, but a fallacy by definition is a bad argument. Using them doesn't invalidate the premise, but it doesn't further it. They are things you use quite a lot of the time when you can't come up with a good argument.
-I don't avoid direct questions when asked. I'm not saying I never miss one but dodging something you don't have a good reply to is cowardice in my opinion. It also gets me in trouble. Because it gives the person I talk to an easy way to derail a debate. Simply ask me questions, and pretty soon I'll be a dog chasing my tail. It's by the way also why I'm going on this tangent, and at the same time am trying to refocus the debate.
-I source what I say and check other people's sources. Something by the way I've learned over the years is an incredible way to educate yourself.
-I make an effort to look at an opponent's argument with an open mind. This is incredibly hard. Ego is a hard thing to overcome.
-I strive for intellectual honesty. Again, not always successful sometimes, again my ego gets in the way.
