Evaluating Local Political Arguments - The art of research, logic, goodwill, and skepticism
by Andy Gilman

We are all flooded with political arguments from many sources, including news media, social media, and our neighborhood gatherings. It’s often difficult to know what to believe, especially where there is a great deal of passion or frequency in the communications. What appears often and appears loudly can appear to be true. Further, if someone’s view of things at all matches our own, their opinion seems to morph into fact. There are many biases and assumptions to stay vigilant about, especially when someone is working hard to persuade us of something. Below are a few principles and practices that can help to navigate the steady stream of perspectives:

1) Find the facts - If an argument is grounded on numerical, objective, or historical data (e.g. The organization spent X dollars in 2025 to buy 10 devices), find the facts for yourself. Most local data can be retrieved, but it takes willingness, time, and perhaps some digging. Arguments that at first seem to be objective can later, after independent research, show themselves to be highly skewed. Omitting important facts in argumentation is easy to do, especially when the facts can counter the point we are trying to make or believe. So, be an informed judge and repeater of information.

2) Find the opinions - If the objective argument, “The organization spent X dollars in 2025 to buy 10 devices…” now adds an evaluation, such as “… and is therefore a failure”, ask yourself why that judgement is the case. Press the opinion. Is the “failure” a year-to-year comparison? Are there other factors to explain the change? Are there reasonable precedents from which to evaluate from? Opinions are completely acceptable, but not when they are presented as facts. 

3) Find the logic - Does the argument offer reasonable conclusions based on sound propositions? Is there a range of possible conclusions? Usually that is the case. If so, does the argument propose that one conclusion is the most probable, or even certain? Why is that? Press the assertion. Further, are unrelated arguments used to support the main conclusion? Did the person intending to persuade offer something lengthy, passionate, and expansive to give a general feeling, such as, “The 2025 purchase was a failure because the organization has failed before in other areas…”.  Be a fussy logician and as emotionally intelligent as you can be, seeing through the irrelevant, the needlessly charged, and the muddy. 

4) Find the goodwill - Assume that the person making the argument has the good in mind. And, assume those to whom the argument is meant to counter also have the good in mind. As most of us want to treat others in the way we wish to be treated, giving the benefit of the doubt is usually productive. Unless we are shown explicitly that it is wise to act to the contrary, goodwill can be our baseline. 

5) But… - Perspectives and desires can obscure our thinking, as can personal interests. Stay skeptical without being cynical. Questions such as, “What does this person want me to believe, and why do they want me to believe it?” can be very handy. Keep your warmth, and your intellectual guard up. 

Arguments and dialogue are means to our progress and collective wellbeing. So, argue well, argue honestly, and argue for the greatest common good. There is much for us to contend with, much to improve, much to celebrate, and much to hope for. Let’s do it as a wonderful community, together. 

End