Those methods do not involve critical thought. You're just replacing one set of slogans with another.
Sure, but once the consensus is shaken...people start thinking critically, having put aside all prejudice and fear of upsetting the holly of hollies - that is very healthy!
Nah. You're just making it less palatable for people in the middle, and creating more extremists on either end. If you were more willing to use facts and reasoned discussion, you would increase the middle ground. Then people would more easily drift toward logical conclusions.
Not at all. The other side resort to some crazy arguments. They start defending Antonio Tarver and other strange things, then you move in with the sound logic.
Let's put it this way...would we appreciate Joe C. enough without China Joe to guide us and amuse us? This man is good for this site and for boxing in general! Boxing needs more supporters like him!:deal
He runs down all fighters from the past, all fighters from America, all the fighters that Calzaghe failed to fight as a passport to his nut-huggery. I would beg to differ.
But in doing so, he attracts attention to them, we discuss them, we appreciate them! You cannot break eggs without encouraging others to make an omlette!