by: Alden I. Bula

There is no need to elaborate in here the origin of the situation as social media has totally exploited the story from the start.  Much has been said about this brouhaha and each one claimed that he or she is correct either as Pro – Manny or Pro –Gay.  However, if one will only dissect and be critical with the disagreement, one realized that everything that has been said are actually contradictions.

What Is A Contradiction

In Philosophy and logic, a contradiction exists when one or two propositions are incompatible.  And when the propositions are taken together, you create two opposing conclusions.  In this Manny and LGBT word war or perception war, the contradictions are not only with the words but with the personalities itself.  The arguments presented for and against both parties are contradictory not only in terms of words but also of actions.  For example, it is pointed out that Vice Ganda is as offensive as Manny Pacquiao or Boy Abunda is as hypocrite as other people only mincing words but do not walk the talk in the  first place.

The Disagreement

The LGBT community cried foul as they perceived that Manny statement was anti-gay as he categorized gay community as lower form of creatures than the animals.  On the other hand, Pro-Manny people were one in defending him by citing Bible verses as their first line of defense.  But the disagreement changed its course as it veered away from determining the real context and instead it is now a public relations matter.  Manny’s defenders were quick to avoid the issue by focusing on Manny’s contribution to national pride and questioned LGBT community if they have done the same impact with that of Pacman’s contribution.

The Art of Disagreement

Clearly, it is quite difficult to reconcile the contradictions and the disagreement.  The defenses are irreconcilable in the first place.  The issue right now is no longer about “masahol pa sa hayop” and instead being predominantly Christian nation, Manny became a saint among millions for presumable living the words God.

According to Paul Graham, disagreements have 6 levels.  It is important to know these levels as disagreements in the social media networks becomes more pervasive than ever before and has given then notion that everyone has the right to say their piece.

Image from Wikipedia

The 6 Levels of Disagreement

At the lowest level, name calling is the order of the day.  People will not refute disagreements instead resort to labels just to tackle an argument.  Instead of presenting evidences why Manny was wrong, a lot of commented on his physical resemblance on the members of the planet of the apes.

The second level in the hierarchy of disagreement is called ad hominem or relating to the person. In this case, Manny’s opponent will not accept his Bible verses evidences as it is natural for him to do so as he is now a pastor in his Christian community.  And the LGBT community peppered Facebook and Twitter with a Wikipedia article enumerating different species of animals exhibiting homosexual tendencies.

The third level is about responding to the tone instead of the communicator.  In this case, the LGBT community where offended with the disgusted tone of Manny’s statement because of the “masahol pa sa hayop” phrase.  At the other side of the equation, Manny’s defender were quick to plaster Manny’s achievements and create the notion that it is alright to verbally attack others when one contributes to national pride.  However, other group of defenders pointed out that many of the LGBT people made fun of his family but did not reacted and took the ill humor the way one ignores his or her own verbal shenanigans.

boyabunda zeibizdotcom
Image from Yahoo 

The fourth level of disagreement is called contradiction and in this case, Manny defenders nailed it right when they tackled Vice Ganda’s propensity for offensive humor.  However, disagreeing at this level is still considered not as convincing as the next level.

Counterargument is contradiction with reasons.  However, the problem in this level is that people are arguing on two different things.  One side is presenting Old Testament statements and the other side attacks Manny as a person not on the basis of his statements.

At the top of the hierarchy is refuting the central point.  However, in this case, there are two central points that needs to be refuted and unfortunately both parties only refutes on the statement on what is supposedly wrong.  There is no reconciliation of ideas as Manny’s fans were too focused on the Bible evidences and the LGBT community does not know what they want.  Manny has apologized and it seems it is not enough for them.

There are many ways that this gay fiasco can be dissected.  Focusing on the contradiction and the disagreement might help reconcile the conflicting ideas and tackle the disagreements on proper context and avoid creating more contradictions which do not help both camps.  If this is about winning the war, clearly Manny’s camp is winning and the LGBT community is losing by virtue of their own contradictions.






Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s