Debating
- Thread starter Bruenin
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Debating is great so long as both parties know what there doing/respect each other. Otherwise it often just turns into a sling fest of fallacies in order to "win" or something. There is nothing like a good debate to learn a different view point and to get a better understanding of your own.
That group seems dead as far as I can tell. Only two of the members have been active this year, and that was in April. The creator hasn't been around since May 2010. Maybe its time to start a new group?Bruenin said:I found thisFlames66 said:That sounds like a good idea to me. Someone make a debate group so I can have some good chats with people.Hazy992 said:Don't know about any user groups, but if there isn't it couldn't hurt to make one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Debate-Room-for-Gentleman-and-Gentlewoman
heh, i'll have to create a completely unexpected thread next time!Clearing the Eye said:
Maybe, but I wouldn't be a good leader for a groupNavvan said:Debating is great so long as both parties know what there doing/respect each other. Otherwise it often just turns into a sling fest of fallacies in order to "win" or something. There is nothing like a good debate to learn a different view point and to get a better understanding of your own.
That group seems dead as far as I can tell. Only two of the members have been active this year, and that was in April. The creator hasn't been around since May 2010. Maybe its time to start a new group?Bruenin said:I found thisFlames66 said:That sounds like a good idea to me. Someone make a debate group so I can have some good chats with people.Hazy992 said:Don't know about any user groups, but if there isn't it couldn't hurt to make one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Debate-Room-for-Gentleman-and-Gentlewoman
heh, i'll have to create a completely unexpected thread next time!Clearing the Eye said:
so someone else would have to do it, any suggestions?I suppose I could do it but I'm not exactly interested in leading it myself. However I do want this group to happen so if no one else steps up to make it by the end of the day I'll create a group and report back to this thread.Bruenin said:Maybe, but I wouldn't be a good leader for a groupNavvan said:Debating is great so long as both parties know what there doing/respect each other. Otherwise it often just turns into a sling fest of fallacies in order to "win" or something. There is nothing like a good debate to learn a different view point and to get a better understanding of your own.
That group seems dead as far as I can tell. Only two of the members have been active this year, and that was in April. The creator hasn't been around since May 2010. Maybe its time to start a new group?Bruenin said:I found thisFlames66 said:That sounds like a good idea to me. Someone make a debate group so I can have some good chats with people.Hazy992 said:Don't know about any user groups, but if there isn't it couldn't hurt to make one
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Debate-Room-for-Gentleman-and-Gentlewoman
heh, i'll have to create a completely unexpected thread next time!Clearing the Eye said:
Combine Rustler said:
I tend to agree with these two - except that I usually reserve the word "debate" for any scenario where one side is simply trying to win; debate belongs in politics only for that reason.Bertylicious said:
When there is a serious problem to be solved, I think dialogue should take the place of debate, which would be more like the process Bertylicious described.
So I wouldn't say I like the idea of debating for personal enjoyment - at least not when a serious, profound issue (like ethics, the future of humanity, etc.) is the topic.
To be fair I was just ripping off Plato.TWRule said:
Should stupid people be denied an opinion though? If a thick man says he's worried about something, isn't that just as valid as a smart man saying he's worried about something?Vault101 said:
The only issue I see is if the thick man is so thick that he doesn't realise that he is thick. Then you'll never get anywhere, but then you wouldn't if the smart man didn't realise he was thick either. We're all pretty thick at the end of the day.
Personally I've always preferred the 'verbally batter them until they agree with you or give up'. And since I view someone saying "let's just stop" as them admitting they were wrong, I never fucking stop first.
Not a particularly healthy way to go about it, but then most of the time if it's not that, it's this irritating self-congratulatory wank of "I respect your opinion and we both have opinions and oooh isn't that nice, let's agree to disagree".
Not a particularly healthy way to go about it, but then most of the time if it's not that, it's this irritating self-congratulatory wank of "I respect your opinion and we both have opinions and oooh isn't that nice, let's agree to disagree".
Except that most of the time, people aren't throwing back these terms because the other person said something stupid, it's because the other person said something that wasn't completely in line with the very narrow track of his particular argument. Again, I'm not having a debate. I can change the subject. I can say things which aren't direct counterarguments to only the thing the other guy said. And I can damn well resort to petty insults when I choose.Vault101 said:
Yeah, people should know what those terms mean, but for gods sake that doesn't mean they have to live strictly by them.
Haha, this so very much.Woodsey said:
I take to pacing myself now - saying I'll duck out before things get tedious. Debaters spend a lot of time, trying to convince opponents who'll never ever be convinced by what the debater has to say. But there is an audience of lurkers, and they're the one's your ultimately trying to convince - folks who haven't quite made up their mind on the sitaution yet, and are receptive to both sides. When you realise that these are the people you'll have the most success with, you become more self-aware. You try to sound less boorish or boring, for the sake of those people.
This has helped me end a lot of debates early. I now say my piece, defend it a little, and then bow out. If the opponent wants the last word, they can - if pushed enough, they'll be sounding utterly incoherent anyway, so having the last word will only undermine their efforts. Let them put their audience off.
I'm not fond of people who don't like debates/arguments and avoid them at all costs because it boils down to 3 main reasons:
- they don't want to hear anything they don't agree with
- they don't want to hear anything they're not comfortable with
- they don't want to hear that they're wrong about something
If you keep avoiding these 3 things, you're creating this metaphorical bubble around you which slows you down, both intellectually and socially.
- they don't want to hear anything they don't agree with
- they don't want to hear anything they're not comfortable with
- they don't want to hear that they're wrong about something
If you keep avoiding these 3 things, you're creating this metaphorical bubble around you which slows you down, both intellectually and socially.
I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at. Things like logical fallacies are not explicitly used in formal debates (see Political Debates) any more than every day discussion. I don't think its even used to score in competitive debates. Of course you can converse however you want. If your intent is to just throw out an opinion or call somebody a name then do that. If you're trying to defend your point, refute someone's statement, or persuade others to your view then whether you like it or not you've just entered an argument. It is not unreasonable for someone to hold you up to logical standards in those conditions.everythingbeeps said:
That said a lot of people throw the terms around when it isn't necessary and/or useful. If someone is saying "You're a fucking a shithead so anything you say is shit" pointing out the Ad Hominem fallacy isn't going to do anything productive. A lot of people do this regardless and ironically many of those people commit some form of the fallacy fallacy while doing so.
A lot of people also use fallacies incorrectly. Using the case of Ad hominem again simply because someone calls you a name does not mean they are committing Ad Hominem. The important part is the "Attack on person -> Their argument is invalid" step. The fallacy has to be used during the connection of the premise to the conclusion. If they use the statement elsewhere such as in a different argument or as a tangential statement then it is not a fallacy.
For example
Person A: A->B->C
Person B: A->B is actually a false implication for reason D, therefore A->C is an unknown implication you idiot.
Person A: My mistake A->E->C.
Person C: You're clearly an idiot so that is a false implication.
Person B did not make a fallacy simply because he called the person an idiot. He did not use that statement in his argument and thus his argument remains valid. Person C however is a clear example of the Ad Hominem fallacy.
TL;DR: Its reasonable for people to point out your fallacies in an argument, but they are often wrong or counter productive in doing so.
I'm an awful debater. I'm always convinced I'm right. Which results in me winning almost all of my debates, since I don't back down. But that's not how debates should go. I only concede that I could wrong to one person, but that's because I'm so whipped :/
I have found the The Escapist has the best user base to argue with, no matter what subject it is about. You can have reasonable non-flame war arguments about anything, you just have to not start it yourself, and most people will carry on an argument with you. Obviously some topics are more inflammatory than others, so all members of the debate have to be careful.
What makes The Escapist such a good environment for debating, is that we are all here because we think the rest of us (or at least most of the rest of us) are reasonable enough to have debates and discussions of controversial nature.
Hmm, I should really post the analysis of The Escapist that I did for one class last term...
What makes The Escapist such a good environment for debating, is that we are all here because we think the rest of us (or at least most of the rest of us) are reasonable enough to have debates and discussions of controversial nature.
Hmm, I should really post the analysis of The Escapist that I did for one class last term...
For the most part, I don't like having strong debates in anything but person. If I do it online it'll only take one misunderstanding or one person feeling cocky to sudden dissolve away any pretence of discussion and just turn into a shit-slinging session.
The Escapist is pretty awful for this, if I'm honest. If two people disagree on the Escapist, in general within three or four posts at least one of them will indirectly call the other an idiot: this helps no-one.
The Escapist is pretty awful for this, if I'm honest. If two people disagree on the Escapist, in general within three or four posts at least one of them will indirectly call the other an idiot: this helps no-one.