But like I mentioned, we’re on the same team

This type of language can set people off. The first time you used it, it seemed to suggest that I was acting like we weren't on the same team. It seems presumptive and suggests that you thought I was being combative. While on the surface it seems an attempt to diffuse, on the receiving end it is combative itself in its assumptions.

If you don't respond to a person directly, it can cause them to be defensive. You don't have to agree or concede to diffuse verbal tension (what people mistakenly call "an argument"), you only need to make the person feel that they have been heard..

I suggest if you choose not to engage, don't engage. Pretending to diffuse, when there is no combat, while also being dismissive is offensive.

The bottom line is we have much more important things to focus on

The amount of disclosure and understanding that comes out of conversations like this has been amazing in my experience. You never know what you're gonna get when you bite into that chocolate. The debate brings thought, understanding, the Gestalt of many minds. Others have figured out things I haven't, and I have figured out things other's haven't. The debate brings all that together for an appreciation of a far larger scope than any of us can reach in our own investigations.

I'm not suggesting you should engage in every topic, but to suggest to others that it is a waste of time is ludicrous. I learn so much from exactly such engagements of debate. I use that information to wake people up. I personally have nothing more important in my life than that endeavor. I am trying to save lives, and I often use the outcome from debate to do so.

All good now?

Fair enough.

But like I mentioned, we’re on the same team

This type of language can set people off. The first time you used it, it seemed to suggest that I was acting like we weren't on the same team. It seems presumptive and suggests that you thought I was being combative. While on the surface it seems an attempt to diffuse, on the receiving end it is combative itself in its assumptions.

If you don't respond to a person directly, it can often cause them to be defensive. You don't have to agree or concede to diffuse verbal tension (what people mistakenly call "an argument"), you only need to make the person feel that they have been heard..

I suggest if you choose not to engage, don't engage. Pretending to diffuse, when there is no combat, while also being dismissive is offensive.

The bottom line is we have much more important things to focus on

The amount of disclosure and understanding that comes out of conversations like this has been amazing in my experience. You never know what you're gonna get when you bite into that chocolate. The debate brings thought, understanding, the Gestalt of many minds. Others have figured out things I haven't, and I have figured out things other's haven't. The debate brings all that together for an appreciation of a far larger scope than any of us can reach in our own investigations.

I'm not suggesting you should engage in every topic, but to suggest to others that it is a waste of time is ludicrous. I learn so much from exactly such engagements of debate. I use that information to wake people up. I personally have nothing more important in my life than that endeavor. I am trying to save lives, and I often use the outcome from debate to do so.

All good now?

Fair enough.