I like the idea of rational argument as a sign of intellectual respect, but I don’t like things that are so easy to use as fully general debate stoppers, especially when they have a built-in status element.
But note that Elinor doesn’t use it as a debate stopper, or to put down or belittle Ferrers. She simply chooses not to engage with his arguments, and agrees with him.
The way I usually come in contact with something like this is afterwards, when Elinor and her tribe are talking about those irrational greens, and how it’s better to not even engage with them. They’re just dumb/evil, you know, not like us.
Even without that part, this avoids opportunities for clearing up misunderstandings.
(anecdotally: some time ago a friend was telling me about discussions that are “just not worth having”, and gave as an example “that time when we were talking about abortion and you said that X, I knew there was just no point in going any further”. Turns out she had misunderstood me completely, and I actually had meant Y, with which she agrees. Glad we could clear that out—more than a year later, completely by accident. Which makes me wonder how many more of those misunderstandings are out there)
Ferrers is arguing—at great length! - that there is just as much space in a small cottage as in a much larger house. He is plainly ridiculous. Elinor sees that there is no point trying to correct him or engage someone so foolish in reasonable conversation, but she is far too well-bred to mock or insult him. So she does the correct thing in this situation, and agrees with his nonsense until it blows over.
She’s certainly not going to take his advice, and knock down a stately home to build a cottage.
Jane Austen, Sense and Sensibility.
Ambivalent about this one.
I like the idea of rational argument as a sign of intellectual respect, but I don’t like things that are so easy to use as fully general debate stoppers, especially when they have a built-in status element.
But note that Elinor doesn’t use it as a debate stopper, or to put down or belittle Ferrers. She simply chooses not to engage with his arguments, and agrees with him.
(I haven’t read the book)
The way I usually come in contact with something like this is afterwards, when Elinor and her tribe are talking about those irrational greens, and how it’s better to not even engage with them. They’re just dumb/evil, you know, not like us.
Even without that part, this avoids opportunities for clearing up misunderstandings.
(anecdotally: some time ago a friend was telling me about discussions that are “just not worth having”, and gave as an example “that time when we were talking about abortion and you said that X, I knew there was just no point in going any further”. Turns out she had misunderstood me completely, and I actually had meant Y, with which she agrees. Glad we could clear that out—more than a year later, completely by accident. Which makes me wonder how many more of those misunderstandings are out there)
I see the point, but on the other hand it leads to “Lie back and think of England” situations...
Somehow I doubt that this argument is meant to be limitless in strength. It’s more of a ‘don’t feed the trolls’ guidance.
Exactly.
Ferrers is arguing—at great length! - that there is just as much space in a small cottage as in a much larger house. He is plainly ridiculous. Elinor sees that there is no point trying to correct him or engage someone so foolish in reasonable conversation, but she is far too well-bred to mock or insult him. So she does the correct thing in this situation, and agrees with his nonsense until it blows over.
She’s certainly not going to take his advice, and knock down a stately home to build a cottage.