> I have no interest in arguing or convincing those who do not.

In my experience, people who say that have a lot of interest in convincing others. It's like, "I don't care what people think or say". It's mostly pre-emptive reply to criticism.

Abstracting further, explicit and unprompted denials are usually protecting something.

That is correct - I am protecting my (very expensive) time from having to waste it on convincing you of something that you don't believe in, when the convincing would not do me any good anyway.

This is not about trying to convince people, it is about bringing convincing arguments to make an interesting discussion. Otherwise, that's just your opinion thrown in there, and why should anyone care?

I'm glad you asked. This is exactly what the essence of my philosophy is all about. I believe that each person's opinions (and each person's existence) are valuable in and of themselves - no need for any further arguments. You either agree with someone (as some people agreed with my original comment, judging by the number of up-votes) or you disagree - and, in my experience, there is NEVER any value in trying to bring those from one camp into the other. Arguments are always a waste of time. Sharing stimulating ideas is a much better use of time and language.

So, no, this is not about "convincing arguments". As with all of existence, this is about making a statement of who you really are and inspiring others. There is intrinsic value in that. I believe in leadership by example. I do not believe in leadership by "convincing arguments".

That sounds like a fairly postmodern-ish stance, which I don't really subscribe to. To me, some opinions are better than others, and being able to articulate them well, showing where they come from and what they immply, is part of what makes many discussions interesting. I don't assume an opinion is so good that others will understand it immediately so there would be no need talk about it, or that it is a great piece of wisdom that I should study or let others study.

Good discussions can make you see things differently, take a new perspective that you had not fully considered before. If you only make "life statements" and never cordially exchange points of view, you lose a much useful way of changing your own; you risk keeping yourself in a warm sense of certitude, losing precious feedback from other people's insight.

>People do not learn by reading

If that is true your comment is utterly useless to anyone reading it.

"Those who speak do not know, and those who know do not speak"

-Said the guy who wrote the Tao Te Ching

Your logic is lacking.

You contradict yourself. If someone is open to accepting what they read, as anyone who was intending to learn by reading would be to some extent, then they can learn by reading.

I guess you've never had to pay rent/mortgage or had to support anyone. In the real world, your advice would get you out on the streets.

In the real world, I support a large family of which I am the only person making money. I have three young children. I pay rent for a house in London proper. Not that any of this is any of your business, but I said it before and I repeat it again - I am EXTREMELY pragmatic and ONLY believe in that which works for me. I am ruthless when it comes to dismissing beliefs that other people accept as dogmatic, but that don't work for me.