What is the EastView?

The EastView Post is a feature of our Discourse segment. It is an effort aimed at creating a space for more good-faith dialogue.

Every author that argues for a particular position on an issue for the Discourse segment will be asked to submit an EastView alongside their main piece. The EastView should capture their understanding of the opposing point of view.

The EastView provides an opportunity for the author to demonstrate a more thorough understanding of the topic and an empathy for those who may disagree with them. We believe the best ideas are forged from the tension of opposing viewpoints, and that those who have done the work of grappling with a sincere opposition will form the wisest perspectives over time.

Conversely, we believe that refusing to engage with sincere opposition, launching diatribes from within our own echo chambers, does not produce constructive discourse or a growth in wisdom.

The EastView should be fact-based and non-toxic in tone.

Beyond that, it is up to the author to decide how rigorous they wish to be in their analysis of the opposing position. The T&Q editorial staff may request a certain minimum level of analytical rigor in the EastView, but it will not be held to the same standards as the main article. This is the author’s opportunity to demonstrate an empathetic understanding of those who they disagree with.

The idea draws inspiration from a long tradition of epistemological tools that have sought to solve the problem of bad faith discourse; how to turn debate into a constructive possibility, rather than a conflict-ridden one?

In ancient Indic debates, known as shaastrarth, there was a similar tradition called purva paksha.

Purva Paksha translates literally to “the previous position.” In an idealized form of this debate, each participant was expected to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the opposing point of view to earn the right to put forward their own position.

The idea of steelman-ing has become popular in modern intellectual circles. To “steelman” an opponent’s point of view, is to understand it in its strongest and most defensible form. If you can defeat the argument, or reveal one of its blind spots, while in that form, that is a laudable intellectual victory. You will have added something truly valuable to the discourse.

If both participants in a debate engage in steelman-ing their opponents’ respective positions, it would likely lead to a very vibrant and productive debate that would benefit all.