I guess my point is that settling factual and logical disputes with Jws has proven more challenging than I realized. In order to explain this I illustrated my point with those born in . But the same argument can be used on any convert of a belief or moral system.
Yes, reasoning with facts is the one thing that brainwashing takes away. I have posted in other threads about how one can get a better result when you address their feelings, not what they reason. People cannot join an organization based on reasoning that they have not yet learned. What makes them join and stay is what the Wt makes the feel, being that comfort, hope, a sense of certainty, etc. If you argue that instead of what the bible says in some of its books, I'm sure you may get a better/stronger reaction.
My conclusion is it is not always that a poster is deliberately argumentative, when they fail to offer convincing reasons to justify a belief or moral opinion. The trick is to know when we are not going to convince someone on the validity of our argument
Looking from a knowledge-only perspective, absolutely. The "argumentative" part comes from them defending the thing that to them represents important life changing decisions that they have made. A person cannot automatically say "Sure, you're right. My son died because we didn't have him get a transfusion, I never pursued any financial goal, career aspiration, and had to marry this passive/aggressive ____ out of pressure from my congregation peers, and I have dedicated all my life and made all my important life decisions around what I argue, but no problem. You're right; I'll just make a change in believe system and life changing decision making because of what you just showed me". That cannot happen. What they defend is what they feel, not what they know.
