Preemption and irenic dialogue

One of Vern Poythress’ maxims of symphonic theology is preempting the strong points of opponents:

As we saw under the previous maxim, sometimes we are dealing with outright error, not just a harmonizable difference of viewpoint. In such cases, it is often worthwhile trying to figure out what other people fear and what are the strongest points in their arguments. We should try to find some grain of truth in their fears, in their strong points, and in the things that they care for most intensely. Even if there is only a distant similarity between what they assert and what is actually true, we can find the primary points of similarity. Starting with the actual truth closest to their viewpoint, we can develop a perspective from which to expand to the truth that we want them to learn. We can, in other words, “steal their thunder,” or preempt their strong points.

To some degree, ever since I read this book and John Frame’s The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, I have been attempting to apply the practical guidelines for theology that they have taught, including this one. And, while Poythress states this point in a somewhat adversarial manner, I think that actually practicing this maxim would have the effect of creating greater harmony (as he intended it to), rather than increasing antagonism. If every theo- or politico-blogger operated by this principle, I believe that much vitriol and pointless diversion by red-herrings would be spared.