A Tentative Defense of One-Side Advice Arguments

In two recent conversations with friends, each independently mentioned how they have come to value expository writing that maps out all the different sides of a complex issue and explains how various people or schools of thought have navigated the issue, letting the reader explore the various perspectives themselves and forming their own answer. This form of writing is important, but for whatever reason, when I write prose, I have been drawn to a certain type of opposite: presenting a specific side or angle as a persuasive piece in order to nudge the reader to consider that side. This essay is a tentative defense of such one-sided arguments. 

Life is complex, and practical or everyday wisdom needs to include multiple, even contradictory, pieces of advice in order to successfully navigate this complexity. Books or other compilations of proverbs as a genre of literature handle this well. A proverb is a one-side suggestion for how to handle a particular situation, and many compilations of proverbs offer conflicting advice over the course of the work. 

To a strict logician, this may at first glance seem like a contradiction, but in the complexities of life, two conflicting thoughts can be true in differing situations. For example, the early bird does get the worm, but the slow and steady also win the race. These popular proverbs in US society technically reflect opposite sentiments, but there are times in life when quick action is advantageous and times when slow pacing is more useful. 

Everyday wisdom is best when it is well-rounded and can consider the potential values in all, including directly opposing, vantage points. This is where one-sided opinion pieces fit in. They, like a proverb, offer one side or vantage point about how to navigate this complex thing called life, and as such, have value in the tapestry of everyday wisdom. 

Society and regular social discourse may favor certain angles or ideas and don’t give other advice or vantage points due consideration. Presenting these left out angles as one-sided pieces counters that tendency and gives this perspective its due. It too may not be the only answer, just like the mainstream angle isn’t, but by unabashedly preventing it in a one-sided way, one counteracts the tendency to ignore and forces people to give it its due. 

There are times when encyclopedic maps of the entire landscape of an issue are useful, but such an “in the clouds” perspective does not always meet people where they are when figuring out how to navigate the complexities of everyday life where it occurs. For that, one often needs to trudge along on the ground and explore how each piece of advice is well-adapted to its specific circumstance to determine what lessons (if any) one will glean from it that day. Maybe that is why so many cultures synthesize their everyday wisdom into proverbs, since it precisely reflects what has worked to solve each of the problems of that day.