The importance of being in stasis

I found it very interesting how important it is to be in stasis. The example for the topic on abortion was very revealing. It is very clear to me now that the two parts are discussing two different aspects of the same issue. Moreover, according to the authors, the reason why the issue hasn’t been resolved is because it was not in stasis which means that they haven’t agreed on what to disagree.

I think it is very common that this happens in our daily lives discussions. Many times I’ve found myself discussing an issue without being able to get to an agreement and feeling that me and my counter part are speaking in different languages. Now, I think that many of those times the discussion was not in stasis. Most of the times, we think that since we are discussing about the same topic, we are discussing the same issue. However, Crawley and Hawhee help us to make a clear distinction between those two situations. In order to develop a good argument that in addition will lead to a resolution, we need to agree on what specific issue we are disagreeing.

While reading the stasis theory and the cases used to exemplify it, I realized how useful the questions are to really achieve stasis, to clarify ones mind about the subject and especially think about the assumptions and values shared by members of the audience. (72).

As the authors state, this technique is important because it helps us to recognize that there are always two sides to every argument and that people can change their minds about the issues. Moreover, it can reveal that there are more than two sides to any issue.

Reading this chapter and especially the example about abortion, made me think about an issue I’ve been thinking about for a while and which has started discussions with friends and my partner as well. The discussion is about having children or not. I am sure most people will have strong positions about this issue. Especially because, in my opinion, it is a visceral and instinctive subject. Most of us don’t really rationalize this decision, but rather feel it or let it happen. I would like to try and follow the method systematically as suggested to see what happens.

The question about having children can be, as with most subjects, theoretical or practical. The main practical question in this case would be: should people have children or not? A theoretical question would ask for the right reasons for having children.

Following the conjectural, definition, quality and policy questions, one can ask about the subject questions such as: should people in the US have children? (In this case the answer would be completely different if you asked the question about a country like Denmark where most of the population is elderly. Or in a country such as China where there is overpopulation.) What are the implications and consequences of having children in the 21st century? Is it appropriate or inappropriate to have children at a certain age? Is it necessary for humanity that people have children? In what circumstances is it appropriate to have them? Should the governments regulate the number of children a couple can have as it happens in China?

Off course, I can stay here writing questions forever. However, the question that concern me the most about the subject is whether or not people actually should think about having children or if they should just follow their instincts. Should people review if their current partner would be a good parent? Should they review their current financial situation? Should they evaluate if they are willing to commit to this enterprise for the rest of their lives? Should they revise if they are the kind of people that are willing to sacrifice their comfort to benefit someone else well being? Or as many people say, they should not think about these questions because if they do they will never have them...

In any case, the questions method helped me to clear my mind about the discussion. I am sure that in future discussions my speech will be more structured than that of my counter parts who haven’t done the exercise. I will have more arguments because I have explored different stands on the subject. Moreover, if I took the time to answer each of this questions, I would have many reasons to support my stand because I will have had developed each idea fully. And most importantly, I will be able to point out to them that we need to be in stasis when having the conversation and decide what specific issue it is that we are going to discuss.