Is debate even functional today? (conspiracy, abortion, state, support)
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.
My understanding of debate is that it can be used as a tool to encourage discussion and intellectual progress. However, it often seems that whenever there is a debate between two groups on a particular subject, it's more important for either team to be right and to win than it is to make any sort of intellectual progress/cooperation. Furthermore, before you can even make your point, your opposition is already lined up to attack you or make their own point. They're not concerned with listening to what you have to say, but concerned with how they are going to make their own point stand out. They're not engaged in listening mode, they're in all-out attack mode. Obviously you can see how this is not a productive means for exchanging ideas.
I guess what I'm getting at is that debate seems to be treated more as sport (I win! You lose!) than it is a method to reach of more cooperative conclusion.
Do you agree? Is there anything that you can think of that can be done to improve this tool?
My understanding of debate is that it can be used as a tool to encourage discussion and intellectual progress. However, it often seems that whenever there is a debate between two groups on a particular subject, it's more important for either team to be right and to win than it is to make any sort of intellectual progress/cooperation. Furthermore, before you can even make your point, your opposition is already lined up to attack you or make their own point. They're not concerned with listening to what you have to say, but concerned with how they are going to make their own point stand out. They're not engaged in listening mode, they're in all-out attack mode. Obviously you can see how this is not a productive means for exchanging ideas.
I guess what I'm getting at is that debate seems to be treated more as sport (I win! You lose!) than it is a method to reach of more cooperative conclusion.
Do you agree? Is there anything that you can think of that can be done to improve this tool?
I think there are two kinds of debate.
One is an intellectual exercise.
The other is the kind of "debate" where groups (as in today's politics) are fighting for their beliefs. In this kind of atmosphere, frankly I'm often not interested in hearing the other side's viewpoint because I've already heard them ad infinitum. Take for example the "debate" over abortion. I grew up listening to that debate in the 1960s, and now almost 60 years later there's not much more to learn about the crux of the debate.
I guess what I'm getting at is that debate seems to be treated more as sport (I win! You lose!) than it is a method to reach of more cooperative conclusion.
Do you agree? Is there anything that you can think of that can be done to improve this tool?
Are you talking about debating in general, or this forum in particular?
Campaign debates are hopeless; I don't like watching them as issues are not intellectually discussed at all.
This forum is half hopeless as a lot of posters are way too emotional. For instance if you ask a question about someone's stance, the poster too often will get really defensive and may result to ad hominem attacks. People don't get that the Socratic method is not a rebuttal but meant to elucidate a position better.
As to your question - for this forum, I think that only more admin over-sight can make the discussions be a higher quality.
people are no longer taught basic logic and cannot stick to the topic at hand. They bring in all sorts of tangents, personal attacks, or personal experience (my neighbor was hit by a car so all cars are bad), only that are rife with logical fallacies. Or base an argument on emotion only with no basis in logic at all.
To have a true debate of ideas you need two things:
1. Knowledge of the subject
2. the ability to reason and understand logic
Most people fail at least one of those. Here's a quick review of how debates fall off track quickly.
Ad Hominem
Appeal to Authority
Appeal to Ignorance
Bandwagon Fallacy
Begging the Question
Loaded Questions
Non Sequitor
Red Herring
Slippery Slope
Straw Man
Two red flags for me are if someone says "snopes says so" or well that's just a "conspiracy theory," I know that they have done zero research. Either response brings absolutely no informed, logical argument. but attempts to shut down further discussion.
And I agree that most people are just waiting for their turn to speak. They do not know how to listen.
Debates can be pointless at times people are going to see, believe whatever they want & at some point your chasing your own tail. In the end no one really wins a debate unless it's being scored by someone else everyone walks away with their ideas that they came in with.
Two red flags for me are if someone says "snopes says so"...
Snopes has a far better record than any of the flavors of FOX News or any of the faux think-tanks of the right-wing disinformation media. If you are looking for the villains in this piece, the latter are the place to start your search.
Snopes has a far better record than any of the flavors of FOX News or any of the faux think-tanks of the right-wing disinformation media. If you are looking for the villains in this piece, the latter are the place to start your search.
My point is that it indicates that the poster's answer:
1. Doesn't offer evidence
2. Doesn't address the topic of the debate
3. Doesn't offer an analysis of what snopes posted
And your response proved my point: What does FOX have to do with anything? NOTHING. Yet, you've dragged it in as if it is part of the issue. It's not.
Now, if someone posts, "On snopes it said XYZ. When I looked up XYZ, I found ABC, which supports XYZ."
THAT is using evidence to support an argument. "Snopes said so" isn't a logical argument. I don't know what "snopes said" so I cannot refute or agree with that statement ... it just hangs there.
Are you talking about debating in general, or this forum in particular?
Campaign debates are hopeless; I don't like watching them as issues are not intellectually discussed at all.
This forum is half hopeless as a lot of posters are way too emotional. For instance if you ask a question about someone's stance, the poster too often will get really defensive and may result to ad hominem attacks. People don't get that the Socratic method is not a rebuttal but meant to elucidate a position better.
As to your question - for this forum, I think that only more admin over-sight can make the discussions be a higher quality.
I don't think that they should be called "campaign debates". They are our chance to see how the candidate interact. For example, and in this post I'm not classifying the behavior, Trump in his first week is acting pretty much as he did in the GOP debates.
people are no longer taught basic logic and cannot stick to the topic at hand. They bring in all sorts of tangents, personal attacks, or personal experience (my neighbor was hit by a car so all cars are bad), only that are rife with logical fallacies. Or base an argument on emotion only with no basis in logic at all.
To have a true debate of ideas you need two things:
1. Knowledge of the subject
2. the ability to reason and understand logic
Most people fail at least one of those. Here's a quick review of how debates fall off track quickly.
Ad Hominem
Appeal to Authority
Appeal to Ignorance
Bandwagon Fallacy
Begging the Question
Loaded Questions
Non Sequitor
Red Herring
Slippery Slope
Straw Man
Two red flags for me are if someone says "snopes says so" or well that's just a "conspiracy theory," I know that they have done zero research. Either response brings absolutely no informed, logical argument. but attempts to shut down further discussion.
And I agree that most people are just waiting for their turn to speak. They do not know how to listen.
Most people are not here to do formal debating, and as such the sub-forum is mis-named. It's more an open discussion.
But as far as your list above -- good debaters don't bring these terms up in a discussion, because all too often they are simply used to shut off "debate".
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.
