Why do we scream?

Why do we scream?

Does anyone imagine that a heated argument is made between leisurely reasoning and not based on an exchange of expletives? According to the RAE, to discuss is "to contend and claim reasons against someone's opinion". The most curious thing is that in the definition itself there is talk of going against something, and not going in favor of one's opinion. That is to say, whoever discusses, by definition, has more interest in attacking an alien thought than in defending one's own. Maybe that's why you need to scream. If it sounds louder, it imposes more. And that is about intimidating, forcing and discrediting. That is to argue. At least it is what you see, and more than fashion, by habit.

Debating, which seems a softer term, is not. It goes without saying that the “debates” that we see on television end up destroying any good image we have of the word (or that we want to have). Television apart, to debate, is to dispute for ideas. And to dispute is to argue with violence, it is to compete. I think they are still terms that are too far from what we should consider as a positive exchange of thoughts and ideas.

Instead of debating and arguing, we should set out. No impositions But of course, for that, you have to have arguments. In conclusion, I understand those who scream. To those who decide that a discussion is won with the loudest voice, which is usually also the most empty of content. Who shouts, prefers to hear little. And the one in front, less. Who shouts covers the lack of information he has. Who shouts, has in his voices and words of resonance his best and only arguments. And I talk about who shouts nearby, who shouts from afar tries to communicate. And apparently, in the discussions and debates we live in, communicating is one of the last things that interest us.