But this method is a bit inferior in some ways, because it is much easier to "win" an argument in your own mind when your own counter-arguments aren't themselves subject to dispute.

I agree. It is less than ideal. I have to add that when it comes to a practical issue--should I buy this or that, go on vacation here or there--I ask people who are more more practical than I am. Money is an area in which I lack good judgement. However, if there is an issue where values are involved--euthanasia, birth control, immigration, government spending priorities--that's different. These issues involve worldview and lifetime experience. A discussion about any of these is bound to be emotionally charged. For example, someone I respect, someone who would never knowingly kill a spider, wasn't concerned about immigrants crossing the Rio Grande and being torn up by concertina wire. How do I debate such an issue? It is infused with deeply ingrained values, on both sides. I don't enjoy the inevitable tussle such a discussion would entail.

please don't take that amiss

I try not to read motivation into anyone's actions. If you didn't respond at all, I might think you had nothing to say about my opinion. I do appreciate the reassurance, and response though, and I will be more likely to comment in the future because of that.

Nice community, Reflections. Never thought of posting here but might give it a second look now.