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.
It seems nearly impossible to change someone's mind when it comes to politics. Is there any good in debating, and have you ever switched your position because of a debate?
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,182,294 times
Reputation: 2925
No, debating politics isn't futile. It's always good to see where the other side stands, in any issue. In most debates, it isn't usually a clear-cut answer as to who's 'right'. Both sides usually bring valid points to the table. If a debate remains civil (often difficult on these boards), sometimes new information can be gained, which might even change the dynamics of the argument to begin with. Solutions often come about when both parties discover something that they wouldn't have if they had remained isolated.
As far as switching a position, yes, I've switched a position when I learned new information from the other side. This wouldn't have happened if I hadn't debated. So, overall, debating politics is a good thing.
I can give two examples where I've changed after years of being persuaded. One is drug legalization. I used to be pro-legalization on all the usual libertarian grounds. A couple years ago a friend pointed out to me that when you have the welfare state, the taxpayer is on the hook for the consequences of harmful behavior, so you have to have a nanny state to go with it. Realistically, I don't see our welfare state doing anything except getting bigger, so I have to oppose legalization.
Another is gay marriage. I used to argue for 'civil unions' and against 'gay marriage' on the grounds that the latter is a redefinition of an English word. Now I see conservatives losing support from the gay community and their friends & supporters. I see votes and dollars going to tax and spend liberals that should rightly be going to conservatives. The gay community should be naturally individualist, pro-liberty, and shun collectivism.
I still don't like the idea of redefining of words, but the fight over 'gay marriage' vs 'civil union' is not a hill that I'm willing to die on.
It seems nearly impossible to change someone's mind when it comes to politics. Is there any good in debating, and have you ever switched your position because of a debate?
Actually, yes....
I am now an Atheist because I put my beliefs about religion to the test and found they didn't hold up to rational scrutiny.
Tat's kinda the point of debate. Getting other perspectives on a situation causes you to test what you already believe, about anything, political or not. Most of the time I'd say people just end up more entrenched in the position they already held, but no, I'd say debating is not futile. In fact, it's very important, if your open minded and willing to scrutinize your own convictions.
It seems nearly impossible to change someone's mind when it comes to politics. Is there any good in debating, and have you ever switched your position because of a debate?
It is nearly futile - as there are so many sheep willing to lie and distort, and excuse lies and failures from their political party. This is common on both sides, but I notice it far more with Obama supporters that chastised Bush for various things and are willing to ignore Obama out-Bushing Bush on it.
However, discourse is still preferable and possible.
I have changed my mind on issues over years. In 2008 I supported Hillary. I won't be supporting her in 2016 if she runs. I have changed my mind on various issues too, usually more to the left.
Location: The Land Mass Between NOLA and Mobile, AL
1,796 posts, read 1,662,818 times
Reputation: 1411
Quote:
Originally Posted by valsteele
It seems nearly impossible to change someone's mind when it comes to politics. Is there any good in debating, and have you ever switched your position because of a debate?
I think it's always good to think about what other people say, believe, and think, whether you can persuade them to do so differently or not. I'd argue that any real democracy's health depends upon our ability to do so. Theoretically, at least, we, the demos, need to come together and discuss that which affects our shared polis. We might be moved by different emotions, we might be called to act by different factors, and different notions might animate our most deeply-held thoughts. We might even express such differences through an array of symbols, actions, and phrases. But in the end we should all be open to self-examination, -reflection, and -reiteration.
I don’t think debating politics is completely futile but it sure seems that way sometimes. Decisions always involve choices. Having choice is, inherently, better than having no choice.
Debating politics, or questions involving religion, et cetera, require courage. Courage to see the world in a different way, courage to change your own perceptions. It’s probably easier to see the world in black & white, more challenging to make this case to others. Let’s face it, ideological convictions often make convicts, often leading to voluntary imprisonment. It may be a prison of choice but it's still a prison.
Debating politics may be a choice, one can choose to become involved or not. Although, when it really comes down to it, life is not a spectator sport, it’s more like a performance art. All people have the capacity to make observations about the world. Artists of all stripes, including scientists, have the capacity to change their own perceptions of the world, even for just a moment, even to thoroughly perform a ‘thought experiment,’ even if it just inspires or provokes thought, it doesn’t necessarily have to lead to consensus or ‘perfect’ agreement. It’s a starting point. That capacity can change the world.
Debating politics is not futile. Debating with certain people is.
This. If the "debate" begins with name calling, cliches, rhetoric with little to no facts, then yes, it's pretty much pointless. If someone presents facts and a different, yet rational, interpretation of them, then it can be quite useful to debate poltiical issues ... even if no minds are changed. At least greater understanding is gained.
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.
