My statement was meant as a prescriptive statement (should we care) rather than a descriptive statement (do people actually care); but I now see it was poorly worded. As a descriptive statement, I agree with you.

Also - this kind of thing, where one is persuaded not at the level of belief, but at the level of 'topic of interest' is one place where I think persuasion has a role on forums like these. Some of my most consequential shifts in thought haven't been from changing an already held position, but having an interest aroused where it would not have done otherwise.

To put it in terms I like to use: I've been persuaded about questions, not answers. The most interesting interactions on the forum are not - are never - 'oh you're right', but 'oh I didn't think about that'. — StreetlightX

Gosh, I never know if it's a good idea to interrupt the conversation and backtrack after I've been too busy to get on here for several days but in this case I will just for the dumb comment: I agree!

I think that one problem with the conception of persuasion implicitly offered in the OP is that it seems to set us to work on a static conception of truth and reason. You can't persuade someone to change their long-held philosophical views because a person's philosophy doesn't boil down to the possession of a position which is inferred from the given of 'facts', 'truth', 'modes of reasoning', whatever. It's a lot more organic than that, it involves the development of your whole person. The best you can hope for is the honor of influencing another person's organic development (unless of course you're a tin-pot dictator who has other means of persuasion.).

Forum discussions have a peculiarity in that the form is private, while the arena is public. We tend to argue in an informal way without a real arbiter or even preset rules, like arguments are done in the private sphere. Forum discussions have an added trait of an audience though. As such, they are very much public. You mentioned advertising. In advertising, your target audience generally isn't brand loyal customers of your competition. It's much easier to target the undecided middle. The same is true when it comes to being convincing in a rhetorical sense; you don't try to convince your opponent, rather, you try to make your case to the audience. Modes of persuasion come into play at that point...

Forum discussions have a peculiarity in that the form is private, while the arena is public. We tend to argue in an informal way without a real arbiter or even preset rules, like arguments are done in the private sphere — Ying

Ying, I find what you have pointed out to be profound and a difference I was likely missing. Maybe it is because I wear my heart on my sleeve that I often lose sight of the idea that what I am expressing in the public realm is my private/personal position. But because of this I allow myself to be impacted personally and that is not always a healthy impact.

Maybe I need to listen more to Aristotle rather than arguing with him. :chin:

I have not persuaded anyone on TPF (so I voted no) but I did persuade someone on a forum once. The issue was: should we allow foreigners to come to the US to attend college. He was only thinking of the cost of education, and the absence of a ROI since most return to their native countries. I pointed out something that he had overlooked: we benefit by exposing them to our culture, our values, and our political system.

It was a minor victory, but it demonstrated the need to establish common ground, and that is important to respect the other guy and his position.

Nice one. :100: