Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Send us all kicking turds down the road and get some smart people to debate 'n stuff?
Honestly, what do you expect from this kind of forum? Academic excellence?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit
^Exhibit 1 on why it will never work.
Who said a debate had anything to do with being "academic" or whatever?
Anyone who holds an opinion on an issue (and everyone does) should have reasons for having those views and be able to defend them. We do it all the time in daily life, when we want to convince someone of something, talk someone out of a bad idea, weigh the pros and cons of some major decision etc.
It takes more justification for why you don't support X, than "X is stupid" or "people who support X are losers".
Indeed speaking your mind, having your viewpoints challenged, defending them, being engaged in critical thinking is a healthy thing once in a while.
Location: Appalachian New York, Formerly Louisiana
4,409 posts, read 6,536,583 times
Reputation: 6253
I find that many people are not suited for a debate. They are only suited for an argument, which is different.
Sadly those who don't grasp the concept of a debate and all of it's subtleties seem to believe that they are correct and refuse to learn how exactly to take part in a civil debate. Often they will respond like Chango up there, or worse; dismissing the point entirely for their own purposes and being rude whilst doing so.
What criteria is used for the topics that go in here and elsewhere? In theory, a lot of the "politics and other controversies" topics are the ones that do stimulate/motivate debates, and there can be a lot of good insights as long as the thread focuses on the pros and cons on the issues themselves, not personal attacks on people that support the issue etc. You could have great topics for debate that would also fall into other forums' domains (ie. relationships, parenting, urban planning), such as those about what is good/bad for people and society.
If the issues aren't being discussed/analyzed differently in the style of in "great debates" and the other forums I mentioned, what would be the purpose of keeping "great debates" rather than having it disbanded?
I find that many people are not suited for a debate. They are only suited for an argument, which is different.
Sadly those who don't grasp the concept of a debate and all of it's subtleties seem to believe that they are correct and refuse to learn how exactly to take part in a civil debate. Often they will respond like Chango up there, or worse; dismissing the point entirely for their own purposes and being rude whilst doing so.
I think the average person uses politics as an excuse to fight.
The only thing that worries me more than the conservatives is the liberals. Or maybe I got that backwards.
I find that many people are not suited for a debate. They are only suited for an argument, which is different.
Sadly those who don't grasp the concept of a debate and all of it's subtleties seem to believe that they are correct and refuse to learn how exactly to take part in a civil debate. Often they will respond like Chango up there, or worse; dismissing the point entirely for their own purposes and being rude whilst doing so.
The problem with this point of view is that the `subtleties` which are referred to to often consist of bullying and mendaciousness masquerading as erudition. There is room in true debating -- not the bloodless, morally relativistic type which some here are describing -- for emotion, wit, sarcasm, and, yes, the dismissal of pompous and pretentious pontification.
After all, there is nothing rude about demotic language and the occasional puncturing of a windbag or two. Read what George Orwell had to say about it sometime.
Chango`s post is effective and memorable. It describes the real issue at hand, which is the classism inherent in any attempt to define `greatness` in debates, and indeed the humility required when one is tempted to apply superlatives to any necessarily subjective presentation of viewpoints and opinions. (Of course, the post was also mildly humorous, which I suspect is irritating to the more solemn and thus learned among us.)
The alternative to permitting`Chango-isms`in the spirit in which they are offered, is censorship by the truly sophisticated and deeply knowledgeable people on the Forum, which -- no matter how subtly applied -- is unhealthy, both ethically and intellectually. After all, we may know who we are and why we are superior, but having to constantly remind our inferiors of why they must remain silent becomes so tiresome after a while...
What may we do to increase the level of these debates? To make them truly great?
Make everyone take a professionalism quiz and IQ test before they are allowed to post???
Quote:
Originally Posted by M3 Mitch
You know, in the History forum, the regular posters maintain a certain standard, if you have not posted there, you might not know how they operate, but in addition to the official moderator there are probably 20 or more people who will challenge any un-supported post. They are quite civil, but they do make it clear that there is an expected level of intellectual rigor in that forum, and if you don't measure up, you get flagged. Sort of like the way the Senate *should* work -
What do you think?
Well the difference between the History forum and the Great Debates forum is that the subject matter on Great Debates tends to be regarding more controversial and sensitive topics. People will read a thread title, which may invoke an emotion, which may result in a post. Sometimes these posts are well-reasoned, thoughtful, and contributory to a great debate, but very often they are none of those things.
The problem with this point of view is that the `subtleties` which are referred to to often consist of bullying and mendaciousness masquerading as erudition. There is room in true debating -- not the bloodless, morally relativistic type which some here are describing -- for emotion, wit, sarcasm, and, yes, the dismissal of pompous and pretentious pontification.
I completely agree. While I think that "Great Debates" posters should be held to a higher standard to encourage productive discussion, I also recognize that people can make their point in many different ways and it doesn't always have to be a robotic analysis (which I'm often guilty of ). Sometimes emotional and sarcastic arguments really are the most effective ones. But I think there still needs to be some logic behind it. The problem is when the attacks move from the another poster's argument to the other poster personally. Or when someone says something that is completely flimsy and thoughtless. That's just tacky.
Well the difference between the History forum and the Great Debates forum is that the subject matter on Great Debates tends to be regarding more controversial and sensitive topics. People will read a thread title, which may invoke an emotion, which may result in a post. Sometimes these posts are well-reasoned, thoughtful, and contributory to a great debate, but very often they are none of those things.
Well the same could apply to other forums, if you look at "Relationships" for instance, there are tons of threads where you can get passionate about gender roles, correct social attitudes such as whether splitting the bill on a date is right or not etc. The same could go for something like "Parenting", "Education" etc. People can get obviously worked up about correct ways to teach kids etc.
Some of those topics could easily be topics that are debate topics (if you laid off personal attacks and kept it to discussion of the idea/attitude). They don't have to be stuff that interests the academics in the dusty library, or however the image is. There are just so many possibilities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). Sometimes emotional and sarcastic arguments really are the most effective ones. But I think there still needs to be some logic behind it. The problem is when the attacks move from the another poster's argument to the other poster personally. Or when someone says something that is completely flimsy and thoughtless. That's just tacky.
