Arguing in the "Post Truth" Age

Here's a nice piece on "arguing to learn" vs. "arguing to win" over at Scientific American titled Are Toxic Political Conversations Changing how We Feel about Objective Truth?  It seems that "arguing to learn" really is the only way to have a chance at winning (or at least getting anywhere at all), while "arguing to win" is more akin to "prelude to a fistfight."

Worth your fifteen minutes' read.