# Why discussions?

## Main Question or Discussion Point

Discussion in actually a gathering of confusion/clearity in more than one mind and mathematically one can express this process as:
clearity + clearity = discussion
or
confusion * confusion = discussion
and discussion may finally bring the following outcomes:

confusion * confusion = clearity
confusion * confusion = (confusion) ^2
clearity + clearity = confusion
clearity + clearity = 2(too) clearity

So saying this that discussion is necessary to make things clear doesnt sound well because there is half probability of getting things more worse.

Last edited:

Related General Discussion News on Phys.org
Whatever the odds may be, entropy and syntropy rule all natural phenomena including discussions. If you really have no clue what syntropy is, perhaps entropy really is your expertese.

Another God
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
I don't think the interaction of people can be reduced to such simple terms.
Of course, I could be wrong.

Originally posted by Another God
I don't think the interaction of people can be reduced to such simple terms.
Of course, I could be wrong.
Though E=mc^2 and F=ma are seemingly very simple yet associated physics with them is not that much simple. This means that its not necessary to explain complex things with complex relations or simple things in simple ways. Also, apparent complexity might not be real....
Anyway, my point is not to strength the validity of these relations, actually, I was looking at the effectiveness of discussion...
----------------------------------------------

Another God
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
The effectiveness of discussion is only as effective as the participants involved wish it to be. If both people are only 'discussing' something because they want the other person to see it their way, then there is no value to the discussion. Neither party will learn anything, because neither aim to. Both aim to convince, not be convinced.

If both parties involved are there because they want to learn, then that is another story. Then it is up to each party to explain their current conception, their current beliefs and view of the topic, then let the other party explain why they believe they are wrong. The two can then engage their opposing views, and attempt to resolve the discrepencies.

Since I believe there is an objective truth, I also believe that all subjective beliefs have some basis in this truth. As such, even if two people start from completely opposing positions, the truth is the truth, and one will be proven wrong, or both will be proven wrong eventually. It just takes a keen mind to figure out who is making the mistakes where.

Exactly, the effectiveness of discussion depends upon us personally. Virtue is its own reward, just as syntropy is its own reward.

There is nothing wrong what others have said about discussions but does discussion not orignate from differences.?
There are two extreme case:
1)Those who always want to go for discussions are actually over-estimate their own views. These are people who born with differences and dont do discussions for setteling these.
2)There are few others who avoid discussions, these are people who actually under-estimate their own views and dont want to share these with others.
Well, its always better to avoid differences to avoid discussions actually.