Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-03-2018, 09:09 PM
 
385 posts, read 323,986 times
Reputation: 1578

Advertisements

Here are Noam Chomsky's comments about "debate" starting at 31:45f:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EgaHvr_fFg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-04-2018, 07:46 AM
 
13,511 posts, read 19,276,876 times
Reputation: 16580
I disagree that debate is stupid.
All it's really about is two people (or parties) with different opinions.
I think debating is good...for everyone.
It allows people to hear BOTH sides (or opinions) of a question....I don't know what's wrong with that.
We can never always agree on issues....debates allow us to say how, and why we feel as we do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2018, 05:00 AM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by purehuman View Post
I disagree that debate is stupid.
All it's really about is two people (or parties) with different opinions.
I think debating is good...for everyone.
It allows people to hear BOTH sides (or opinions) of a question....I don't know what's wrong with that.
We can never always agree on issues....debates allow us to say how, and why we feel as we do.
I think what the author was getting at was something the earlier philosophers (Socrates, & Plato's dialogues) were getting at as well. Plato, sometimes on behalf of Socrates, was critical of the 'Sophists'. He contrasted the desire to teach rhetoric & political persuasion (& often for a price) with the (Socratic) desire to learn & teach for the sake of knowledge itself, i.e. for its own sake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2018, 05:02 AM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,922,871 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by townshend View Post
Here are Noam Chomsky's comments about "debate" starting at 31:45f:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EgaHvr_fFg
As above, so below. Mr. Chomsky is going there as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2018, 05:15 AM
 
Location: Cebu, Philippines
5,869 posts, read 4,208,266 times
Reputation: 10942
Quote:
Originally Posted by purehuman View Post
I disagree that debate is stupid.
All it's really about is two people (or parties) with different opinions.
I think debating is good...for everyone.
It allows people to hear BOTH sides (or opinions) of a question....I don't know what's wrong with that.
We can never always agree on issues....debates allow us to say how, and why we feel as we do.
No, it's two people whose opinions are unknown, trying to make an assigned and well-known opinion sound more persuasive to the judges. Much like a trial lawyer trying to have a murderer acquitted.. Which, if he wins, serves no useful purpose. Opinions are not right or wrong depending on how eloquently they are presented.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2018, 10:51 PM
Status: "81 Years, NOT 91 Felonies" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,598,050 times
Reputation: 5696
It depends on what "debate" means - implying that it's easy to equivocate about this.

In the noble sense, "debate" is about presenting your case in an objective, rational, and fair manner; presenting the strongest arguments and addressing the most favorable interpretation of the opponent's arguments, then letting a fair and rational audience decide who has the strongest case. Essentially, it's the same principle and spirit as properly performed science.

Unfortunately, people also use "debate" to mean "point scoring", as if the goal is not to learn something new but to simply do a slamma-jamma through the net, so to speak. That's not debate, that's more akin to a courtroom trial. The McLaughlin Group is a pre-Internet example of this (I expected better from PBS <frowns> )


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSqsBfBCW7k
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2018, 06:53 PM
 
Location: Cebu, Philippines
5,869 posts, read 4,208,266 times
Reputation: 10942
Just an aside: Did you know that Barry Richard was a regisred Democrat when he represented Bush before the Florida Supreme Court in the 2000 election dispute? A classic case of arguing persuasively against your own sympathies in a debate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 04:05 AM
 
7,588 posts, read 4,159,881 times
Reputation: 6946
Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarkar View Post
Don't quite agree with everything but this article hits home, esp when it comes to endless debates and worrying about toppling opponents and naysayers (at least on online forums) rather than actually seeking out the truth.

https://theoutline.com/post/6709/debate-is-stupid
If you are seeking out the truth, then you don't use a debate dialogue. You use persuasion dialogue in which both sides are prepared to take on the ideas of the other. Debate and persuasion use different structures, use different social skills and have different purposes. One is intended to "win" and the other seeks out the truth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2018, 06:32 PM
 
Location: Cebu, Philippines
5,869 posts, read 4,208,266 times
Reputation: 10942
This all became an issue when the TV networks decided that ratings could be improved if they staged a debate of presidential candidates, using high school debate rules. Which was stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2018, 01:34 AM
 
Location: Cebu, Philippines
5,869 posts, read 4,208,266 times
Reputation: 10942
Come to think of it --- did you ever consider just how much of your perception of things is based on what TV networks thought would improve ratings? From Mr. Ed to Storage Wars, it defines the skeleton on which our knowledge is fleshed out.

Last edited by cebuan; 12-12-2018 at 01:45 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:32 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top