This came from the Blog of someone Known as Soapbox or the Soapster. In my Initial Comments on his Post, it is apparent that I was not real Trusting at First, due to the Fact that so many of the Ideas and Rules are Subjective and thus, without a Referee, these Rules may not Work too Well. For Example, rather someone's Argument is shown to be Faulty is Often a Subjective Call, as well as Judgments about rather or not our Opponent is being Rational and Following Reason. Whether or not One Position is more Realistic then another, or the Evidence Offered is Adequate are also Subjective Judgments, as well as the Judgment about whether or not an Argument has been Resolved or not, so that the Discussion can move on to the Next Point, or even whether or not a Certain Fact Presented is Accurate or Inaccurate.
This is why I Kept saying, in the Comment Section of Soapster's Post, "According to Whom?" Because of the Subjective Nature of these Rules, without a Referee, if a Person Desires to be in Control of a Discussion, he could Use the Subjective Nature of these Rules to his Advantage.
Considering this, I decided that these Rules Really are Good, if Used in a Fair Manner, for I Find that when there are no Rules, the Discussion will Generally Degrade into Chaos, yet I also Decided to Add Two more Rules of my Own to the 4 that are Listed on the Flow Chart and here they are below.
5.) Do not Accuse Based on your Own Subjective Opinion about your Opponent's Ability to Reason.
And
6.) These Rules do Need to Apply to all Parties and not just to your Opponent.
Let me Know your Thoughts.
Also, I don't Know why this Post is Insisting on being the Last one on a Page. Please do, though, Click on "Older Posts", for more Posts and Of Course, do Read the Comments, for I have Placed more of my thoughts in the Comments Section.
