In any situation, progress requires
discussion among people who have contrasting points of view.
How would the world be,
if there would be no discussion amongst the people with contrasting view?
Imagine a world of no harmony, trust and mutual understanding. If we do not
share our views the world would not make any progress. It is because of mutual
discussion that we are living in a cultural and technically advanced society.
Thus discussion amongst people with contrasting points of view is highly
essential.
One of the problems
faced by the physicist of late 1900 was discord in the two most popular
theories of physics, quantum mechanics and gravitational physics. Physicist
supported one or the other of the two theories. However, the two could not go
hand in hand with one another. It was only considering the two contrasting
works the contemporary physics came up with string theory.
Yet another example is
the nature of light. Initially light was considered as wave. However, when
further examined it was empirically seen that light was behaving as particle.
Science experts held one view or the other claiming that opponent's opinion
about nature of light is arcane. It was only after mutually considering both
sides the scientist came up with the dual nature of light.
In politics, all the
members of any nations' political system discuss issue in hand with diligence and
come up with an ideal solution. The overall capacity of a group is certainly
more than that of an individual. People with different outlook can anticipate
the various aspect of issue in hand. Contrasting opinion presents various pros
and cons of the situation. Only discussion is a way to optimize conclusion by brainstorming of everyone’s
opinion.
In judiciary many times the lack of harmony between opponents’ hamper with
their capacity of mutually discussing their postulates. Such cases turn more
intricate due to lack of discussion. More than offer these complicated cases
takes a lot of time to untangle. However, cases where the opponents find mutual
settlements by discussion cannot be solved very effectively and easily.
To conclude I believe
that “progress require discussion amongst people who have contrasting point of
view". It is evident from the field of law, research and government that situations,
which are considered with mutual discussion amongst the people with different viewpoints,
are always fruit full.
No comments:
Post a Comment