Will dispute inhibit learning? I concede that under certain circumstances that dispute inhibits learning. For instance, we can look no further than the television set. Dispute manifests itself in rhetorical bouts and shouting matches. The combatants rarely find common grounds with others and acknowledge others’ merits. Dispute also inhibits learning when the debaters fail to agree on the fundamental presumptions which is necessary for discourse. For example, a paleontology student might find it impossible to communicate the theory of evolution with an individual whose religious system prevents the evolution from the beginning. A finance graduate may not deepen their insights into laizzse-faire system via debating with a socialist, who argues that centralized power should control all the economic activities. However, aside from these two forgoing provisos, discourse and debate help people to gain more knowledge, whether at personal, community or global level. At personal level, by listening to the rationale of the seemingly oppressive rules, teenagers would know that certain behaviors naturally carry undesirable results. By listening to the teenagers’ voice about autonomy, parents would find that effective parenting and control are two different things. At the community level, through dispassionate dialogue an environmental activist can understand the legitimate economic concerns of a factory owner who rely on revenues to sustain his business. Conversely, the factory owner might stand to understand the importance of public health and environment protection by realizing huge amount of resources are needed to deal with pollution. Finally, at the global level, by dispute and discourse, two countries might realize mutually beneficial agreement by striving to understand the other country’s legitimate concern for its national security, political sovereignty, the stability of its economy and currency.