You don't seem to have grasped the difference between challenging a belief and insulting the person who holds the belief.
I do not believe in 'quarks', I have seen no evidence for them which I trust, only anecdotal evidence. I do however understand that you hold similar opinions about the exisence of unicorns, which I have seen on more than one occasion[1] but you apparently have not encountered. While I choose to not believe in the existence of your quarks I cannot disprove their existence conclusively, just as you will never convince me that the unicorns I have seen are an illusion, so I therefore suggest that we agree to differ and remain friends.
Or another way:
I have thought about this subject and researched it, and I have not found anything which convinces me that your belief is valid. However, I accept that you may have reasons for that belief which satisfy you, and which you cannot explain or demonstrate to me in a way which convinces me; this is your choice, just as my choice is to believe differently.
Or by 'challenge' do you mean "browbeat the other person into your own point of view"? (In the same way many politicians use the term 'compromise'.) If so then there is indeed no way to do it without insulting the other person, and the only sensible response of that person to is refrain from intercourse with the 'challenger' (there are other less sensible responses, some of which may result in injury to at least one of the parties involved. Don't try this at home).
[1] This is not true in my case, it is invented for the purpose of illustration. The comments about quarks, however, are true for me.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2010-05-10 01:43 pm (UTC)I do not believe in 'quarks', I have seen no evidence for them which I trust, only anecdotal evidence. I do however understand that you hold similar opinions about the exisence of unicorns, which I have seen on more than one occasion[1] but you apparently have not encountered. While I choose to not believe in the existence of your quarks I cannot disprove their existence conclusively, just as you will never convince me that the unicorns I have seen are an illusion, so I therefore suggest that we agree to differ and remain friends.
Or another way:
I have thought about this subject and researched it, and I have not found anything which convinces me that your belief is valid. However, I accept that you may have reasons for that belief which satisfy you, and which you cannot explain or demonstrate to me in a way which convinces me; this is your choice, just as my choice is to believe differently.
Or by 'challenge' do you mean "browbeat the other person into your own point of view"? (In the same way many politicians use the term 'compromise'.) If so then there is indeed no way to do it without insulting the other person, and the only sensible response of that person to is refrain from intercourse with the 'challenger' (there are other less sensible responses, some of which may result in injury to at least one of the parties involved. Don't try this at home).
[1] This is not true in my case, it is invented for the purpose of illustration. The comments about quarks, however, are true for me.