unfortunately that is the case, but i find things i agree with and form an opinion based on them. Is it just frustrating trying to have a discussion with someone who simply cites references as a response or to back what they say?
Yes, because your opinions are not experience based they tend to be instable and often based solely on idealist theories. Philosophy majors and authors rarely deal in facts. The quote "those who can't do, teach [write]" is accurate. I know, because I used to write and realized that writing removed the author from the reality of the subject they were claiming to be an expert on.
Of course, I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but you rarely cite anything I would consider an exception.
So... while I enjoy a discussion with someone who has a differing opinion as a result of having a different set of experiences I find it a complete waste of time to have the same discussion with someone who is simply playing "devil's advocate" because it invariably feels more like an argument and less like a productive discussion.
