Hi All;) .. What's the difference between an argument and a discussion?;D?

Question

Explain your answer.....................
In your own words... No definitions....
>>>>>>>>

Thanks, for answering in advance! ;-)

*Have a beautiful weekend*

Take care!

Thanks, Jimmy :)
>>>>>>

Thanks, Gaz :)
>>>>>>

Thatracknickulais, perfectly possible... :)
>>>>>>>>

Thatracknickulous, .. my mistake...
>>>>>

Answer 1

I have seen some of the answers posted by others. I woud only like to add in

Argument is an
emotional outburst, people dont have their minds into it. People dont think if it is right or wrong but will try to stick what they say is right.
People who argue do not care of the out come.
Discussion is where people try to supress / control their emotion and they would like to get to a point where they want an out come which is desired.

Anyways an argument can also at a point lead into a discussion, likewise discussion can end up in an arguement.

Answer 2

No definitions, huh? I am left to my own devices! Well, since this is my last answer, (so were seven before), I'll give it my best. In MY opinion--an argument is basically expressions of disagreement, where usually, no resolution is accomplished. It can begin in a fairly rational way, but also end in belligerence due to the initial disagreement in which no one truly wants insight, or to yield in any way. (How's that?) I'd say a discussion is a civil exchange of views that can find some common ground, or even a conclusion. An argument is a bit similar to what my professor called "low level philosophy" where someone is talking about an orange, & the other compares it to a rabbit. I refuse to get into arguments. I welcome discussions, because I ALWAYS learn something.

Edit: I find it difficult to share the view that a discussion is "neither person has a strong opinion" without further clarification. Having a strong opinion in discussion, & gaining insights is one of the most delightful things about a discussion. It's like, hmmm--now I see another aspect to this, another perspective well worth exploring.....

Answer 3

The difference between an argument and a discussion, in my opinion, generally has to do with the balance between tone, controversy, and tension. A discussion may raise certain arguments in the meaning of argument as a defensible opinion, but it should not raise the anger, ire, enmity, or civility of those participating in the discussion.
Once again, an argument from the definition of argument as a viewpoint, can exist, and should exist in a discussion, but an argument as it applies to an alternate definition that results in involving people into a hostile conflict, veers away from a discussion, and becomes a matter of locking horns, beating chests, or throwing fists.
Have you ever seen the Monty Python skit about the man who pays to go into the argument department, but is perplexed and annoyed, because all he gets from the argument clerk is a contradiction? The customer says "I came for an argument, but this is a contradiction." No it's not!" replies the clerk emphatically." "Yes it is!" says the customer and so on.
This is probably a more difficult question to answer.
Personally, I love an active discussion that deals with a bit of serious controversy, but I abhor it when these discussions are reduced to meaningless emotional arguments.

Yours open to discussion,
but not argument,

Wise Protector

Answer 4

An atheist (no might desire to capitalize) says i do no longer think there's a god. An agnostic says i don't be attentive to even if or no longer there's a god, and that i do no longer think it rather is a possibility to be attentive to. this is, an agnostic is leaving open the possibility whilst an atheist isn't. the explanation i do no longer bypass away open any threat is that the term "God" (capital letter) has been defined in this variety of way that i'm no longer able to have faith it rather is a possibility for such an entity to exist. to bypass the way of pantheism, for example (all is God) is to apply an exceedingly distinctive definition. an exciting philosophical workout, and has a sturdy little bit of non secular validity, besides the fact that if it is not something on the fringe of the comparable definition because of the fact the Bible, the Koran, or the different theist doctrine.

Answer 5

Arguments are typically exclusive in nature, one's view excludes the other's view in favour of their own. They are also typically selfish in nature, one person "feels hurt" by the other's stance and vice versa creating a cycle of hurt and counter hurt during the exchange.

A discussion on the other hand is the opposite. It is typically inclusive in nature where both sides seek the opinions of the other so that a view can be examined with no "hurt" involved. Typically, each point is raised as a comparison point of interest and a point of similarity rather than difference. There is a sense of comparison and seeking similarity involved and a mutual interest for both parties. When finished, a discussion generally has a feel of continuance and fulfillment and mutual closure. Arguments tend to have the feeling that it is never over with no closure at all just an emptiness of heart.

Peace from a Buddhist.

Answer 6

an argument is where you try to convince or persuade another person or people about your perspective,in such a situation you are never convinced by what the other party says or tries to prove,even though it may be sensible.
But a discussion is where you get together with a group of people or person and verify certain issues or perspective.My opinion is that in any situation it is better to discuss rather than argue and waste your energies because only a discussion can bring about a sensible conclusion.

Answer 7

i think discussions have a mutual dialogue; while two people might be pushing seperate points of view, each can listen & attempt to understand what the other person is saying.

when i argue i completely lose perspective of what the other party is saying & make a manic attempt to further my point, no matter how stupid. i often get frustrated & feel the need to swear, whereas a discussion is a lot more rational & i would be willing to concede.

actually, swearing & insulting the other person or their ideas (ie. "that's stupid" instead of "yes, but...") are probably the markers of an argument.

Answer 8

The primary objective is to exchange ideas on a subject. When people from different spheres meet they do have a different approach and treat the subject as per the sphere they are trained in. This leads to a healthy discussion. But sometimes, when people think that the other who is talking is working in a sphere that is not to their liking or is hindering their chance in a race. So, to prove their point as the only correct one, egos get attached to their statements to make it turn to an argument.

Answer 9

Discussions actually arrive to a mutual solution where both parties are mature enough not to let their emotions and immature feelings and "wanting to win" get in the way. In work situations and esp. in relationships, actually in almost every interrelationship situation, a discussion- no matter how mad or angry or passionate you are about your opinion and getting your way- will be MUCH better and solve so much more than an argument would, where people are yelling and not making sense and saying anything to make their precious egos feel large.

Answer 10

In an argument, two people have completely opposite opinions. In a discussion, neither person has a strong opinion on the subject matter.