By the way. You must be a youngster. It is entirely permissible to refine one's stance in an argument as the discourse develops. It layman's terms, this is called a conversation. This two-way process allows a continuing exchange of ideas that can eventually lead to an accurate and thorough understanding of the viewpoints maintained by the parties in the conversation. This technique is frequently used in all sorts of human endeavors. The educational process often uses this approach. Engineering processes use this approach. Politics should use this approach, but the way people now practice conversation in this country has all but eliminated practical debate.
I'm probably older than you. What's your point?
It is entirely permissible to refine one's stance in an argument as the discourse develops. It layman's terms, this is called a conversation. This two-way process allows a continuing exchange of ideas that can eventually lead to an accurate and thorough understanding of the viewpoints maintained by the parties in the conversation. This technique is frequently used in all sorts of human endeavors. The educational process often uses this approach. Engineering processes use this approach.
Lovely. However, dragging your fellow conversant off on tangents to avoid an admission that you overstepped yourself initially is simply juvenile. Alternatively, holding forth on something tangential and uninteresting to other participants in the conversation is boorish.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you wish to be neither.