The premise with which arguments start is something I find quite fascinating. Most arguments, for example, begin on contradictions which rely on first principles – a concept we learn while debating at University. Identifying these first principles is a great way to see where two differing sides clash.
But when you read a judgment, or some form of a final decision: whether that’s a review, or an opinion piece – all of these start off with premises. Assumptions they make to be fundamentally correct. Over the past few weeks, I’ve been thinking a lot about how these premises also need questioning sometimes, and how sometimes, decision-makers fail to lay out these premises clearly, or fail to offer justification about how their premise is true.
This reading list is a great example: https://www.epw.in/engage/article/why-aadhaar-judgment-flawed-reading-list?0=ip_login_no_cache%3D48e70aea2b0036df81d5e6821b11e4f5