Essay Help Please!

[brentl]

Okay I have no idea what to say here...

"What is your opinion of the claim that honest disagreement leads to progress." I agree, but I don't know what to say at all...

[mono]

To me, it really depends on the context of the thought, but I believe I know what you mean, brentl.
On a humanitarian level, one could easily say that honesty seems one of the best attributes one could offer to another. In a very honest debate, one contributes his/her true and whole opinions, thoughts, and ideas; contributing and devoting this much, a seemingly rare quality these days, shows a respectable amount of committment which may almost come across as a passion or area of study. Sensing this, the person in disagreement will contribute the same corresponding honesty; hence, ideally, a peaceful debate. Especially a bystander can notice when lies, blaming, and personal objections get involved; this, for obvious reasons, creates many heated arguments.
In a more cognitive manner, and, in a way, moral development, in an honest disagreement, of course, someone will always state his/her truthful perspective of a situation, respectively - the perception of what seems right and just. Through simple, humane empathy and consideration, the opponent will ponder on the other's ideas, "putting himself/herself in their shoes," you could say, or Immanuel Kant's concept of universal morals. Even by considering another's thoughts, I believe, one expands his/her world of thought, placing those very frequent "if . . . then" statements together. This one can call moral progress, and combination of two or more honest brains on one subject creates a pact, utilitarian decision, etc.
From this, we can derive two maxims:
- the projection of honesty with another, even in disagreement, promotes kind, just debate full of empathy, and shows devotion.
- considering another's idea in opposition to your idea may create a better solution than either of you, individually, would have thought.

Good luck, and I hope I have helped! ;)

[B-Mental]

"What is your opinion of the claim that honest disagreement leads to progress." I agree, but I don't know what to say at all...

Honest disagreement is essentially two or more parties that respect the others point of view. To accept or respect another point of view while not agreeing demonstrates communication and positive rational interaction. I think positive rational interaction is the key without which progress falters.

Perhaps you would like an example... Two parties could have an honest disagreement over the issue of slavery, one for (property rights) and one against (moral issue). I cannot believe that progress could be made were this topic without some sort of concession...I know we could make a 3/5 clause...wait is that progress?