or rather, that’s what I’ve observed.

A good argument is based on a sound premise(s) and a proposition that reflects the premise presented.

I conclude X based on reasons A, B, and C.

If you want to argue a point, you need to make sure that reasons A, B, and C:

1. are logically sound

2. provide reasonable support for proposition X

If you’re premises strongly support your proposition, then you have a good argument.  Logic plays a huge role in successful argumentation, but many times, people forget to consider the strength of their premises before arriving at a conclusion, or sometimes, they don’t even consider a premise when arriving at a conclusion (i.e. insults/quarrels).

I would venture to say that the reason there is such tension between opposing views on issues such as abortion rights, illegal immigration, religion, Constitutional interpretation, or gun ownership, is because of a lack of reason and/or logic in the arguments.  I’m not saying that the middle ground in the soundest option in any of these issues, but rather, I’m saying that people tend to become “sticky” with their opinions, even in the face of sufficient evidence that disproves their position.  People apply emotional bias to their positions on many issues, and so they don’t research, or they don’t acknowledge that opposing views might not be entirely incorrect.

Some people are so entrenched in their beliefs that nearly every premise they make is logically flawed.

But everyone has argued without reason or logic, we are all very guilty of having fallacious premises and propositions.

Abortion is murder…
Obama is a socialist…
God created the universe…
My religion is the right one…
The Illuminati exist…
The September 11th attacks were an inside job…
Only stupid people support the Iranian “revolution”…
God cured X disease…
Free software is socialistic…
a stolen copy represents a lost sale…
Video games cause real-world violence…
Terrorism is a great threat…

and many more.  These are propositions, some are impractical, some are viable, some are unprovable, and many of them are weak.

A word of advice:  Don’t try to defend a moot point (Stupid people supporting “revolution”, for instance) and don’t try to prove something that is inherently unprovable (religion for instance).  Your argument will inevitably be weak, defeated, or serve only to inflame opposing opinions.

But If you hold a position on a viable issue, make sure the premises for your opinion are strong, and maintain an open mind when confronted with opposing views.  Make sure you have a strong counter-argument before you begin pointing out the flaws in the opposition.  If you aren’t careful, you may end up resorted to ad hominem or fallacious appeals to emotion, or authority, or fear, or beliefs.

A person is not stupid simply because they believe in something that you don’t.

A belief is not stupid simply because you don’t like the person who believes in it.