Learning How to Debate

[DragonStryk72]

When I first came to this forum, I don't think it occurred to me that this is a place where people are serious about debate. I'd participated in many political forums that were nothing more than shouting matches and repetitive "going no place" conversations. I learned to match that kind of style, which was continuous ad hominem, and the nastiest person won.

I can't say I started out wanting to learn to debate, but I'm open to it now.

I have on occassion looked at logical fallacies and have been discouraged from learning to debate. I recognized most of what I was seeing in "debate" was logical fallacy.

It's true I lead with my heart over my brain. I'm not sure that will change but I do admire people who argue well. I'm fairly intelligent, but I'm no scientist, nor am I particularly skilled in logic. Philosophy bored the snot out of me in college.

I'm trained in liberal arts, and social sciences.

No one is telling you not to follow your heart, but debate using your head, and accept that sometimes, you're just going to be wrong. We've all been there on here, and we've all gotten a little too heated, because we all inherently care about we're discussing, so that's gonna happen. The key is being able to pull yourself back from it, and no when you've said your full piece on a subject. Their doesn't really have to be a winner and a loser.

There have been several times where I've walked into a debate talking about what I've seen of the oppositions position, and trying to bring across that perspective on the argument. Usually, I reserve this for when I feel a particular line of thought isn't being represented, and should be talked about.

My biggest thing is making sure not to tell people how they feel. This is probably the biggest debating no-no there is, because there is not a single person on this Earth who likes being told how they feel, and so all that gets accomplish is getting their blood up, and the debate starts to go away. It's also often used as a way to slight someone in a backhanded way, using it in a pejorative manner to evoke an emotional response.

[DragonStryk72]

Sky, see my post about the Islamic girl in my class. Her argument went no where, as she argued against her premise:

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthre...697#post551697

See, I could have argued that one, lol. She could have switched context without switching topic, using the historical evidence of women being the most strict enforcers of Victorian ideals back in their time, both in Europe, and in the United States. While there were opponents to that ideology, there were thousands upon thousands of women who truly believed in those same ideals, and to be sure, they weren't all bad ones.

[darin]

screw you, CH - you're WRONG.

[ConHog]

screw you, CH - you're WRONG.

DMP I'm married, as you well know being wrong comes with the territory. LOL

[Kathianne]

See, I could have argued that one, lol. She could have switched context without switching topic, using the historical evidence of women being the most strict enforcers of Victorian ideals back in their time, both in Europe, and in the United States. While there were opponents to that ideology, there were thousands upon thousands of women who truly believed in those same ideals, and to be sure, they weren't all bad ones.

I doubt you'd have earned her an A. I've seen you turn on a dime. "Muslims should, blah, blah." Then minutes later, "How dare you say that Muslims, blah, blah, you know that's not so...'

Another, "I'm not protecting Sky..." "Don't respond Sky, just be quiet, I'm reporting. I've magical reporting powers. Jim loves me."

[Wind Song]

^^ THIS is a positive suggestion Sky. Don't let a debate get personal where pretty soon you're feeling the need to defend anything more than the topic of the thread.

Positive suggestions are things to do, rather NOT do. To restate your suggestion that would be to keep the debate topic non-personal. Thanks. Great idea.

[Wind Song]

No one is telling you not to follow your heart, but debate using your head, and accept that sometimes, you're just going to be wrong. We've all been there on here, and we've all gotten a little too heated, because we all inherently care about we're discussing, so that's gonna happen. The key is being able to pull yourself back from it, and no when you've said your full piece on a subject. Their doesn't really have to be a winner and a loser.

There have been several times where I've walked into a debate talking about what I've seen of the oppositions position, and trying to bring across that perspective on the argument. Usually, I reserve this for when I feel a particular line of thought isn't being represented, and should be talked about.

My biggest thing is making sure not to tell people how they feel. This is probably the biggest debating no-no there is, because there is not a single person on this Earth who likes being told how they feel, and so all that gets accomplish is getting their blood up, and the debate starts to go away. It's also often used as a way to slight someone in a backhanded way, using it in a pejorative manner to evoke an emotional response.

I may be wrong in my facts, I may be wrong in my premise and assumptions. I am NOT wrong about how I feel. I can speak that truth from the authority of my own experience.

Pulling back before things get too heated is a very good suggestion. Yes, there doesn't have to be a winner and loser.

I've had the experience here of people not only telling what I feel but telling me what I am. I can accept suggestions that address what I'm doing or not doing, but not what I am.

It doesn't matter what other people do, because I have no control over them. I can do a better job of avoiding telling people what they feel or who they are.

It goes both ways. Don't call me stupid, idiotic, moronic, libtard, dyke, man hater, or any other such insults and expect me to address your debate points respectfully.

[Kathianne]

I may be wrong in my facts, I may be wrong in my premise and assumptions. I am NOT wrong about how I feel. I can speak that truth from the authority of my own experience.

Pulling back before things get too heated is a very good suggestion. Yes, there doesn't have to be a winner and loser.

I've had the experience here of people not only telling what I feel but telling me what I am. I can accept suggestions that address what I'm doing or not doing, but not what I am.

It doesn't matter what other people do, because I have no control over them. I can do a better job of avoiding telling people what they feel or who they are.

It goes both ways. Don't call me stupid, idiotic, moronic, libtard, dyke, man hater, or any other such insults and expect me to address your debate points respectfully.

You feel the way you feel. No one can top that. However, what you feel may not be the best end product of what is right or even what YOU want.

[Wind Song]

You feel the way you feel. No one can top that. However, what you feel may not be the best end product of what is right or even what YOU want.

Hmm, the best end product of what is "right" or even what I want. I will think about that now and in the future.

I was a social worker during "welfare reform". I was skeptical of the "welfare to work" program, and it way exceeded my expectations.

I've been opposed to "no child left behind" because it places too much importance on a single test measure. I think it put pressure on schools to do some things in order to keep funding that may not be in anyone's best interests.

I'm conservative in that regard. It sometimes takes me a long time to warm up to a new idea.

[DragonStryk72]

I may be wrong in my facts, I may be wrong in my premise and assumptions. I am NOT wrong about how I feel. I can speak that truth from the authority of my own experience.

Pulling back before things get too heated is a very good suggestion. Yes, there doesn't have to be a winner and loser.

I've had the experience here of people not only telling what I feel but telling me what I am. I can accept suggestions that address what I'm doing or not doing, but not what I am.

It doesn't matter what other people do, because I have no control over them. I can do a better job of avoiding telling people what they feel or who they are.

It goes both ways. Don't call me stupid, idiotic, moronic, libtard, dyke, man hater, or any other such insults and expect me to address your debate points respectfully.

The problem is, however, that many times, you have been the instigator of the name calling, then become irate about names being thrown back. You have to show respect to earn it in return.

You may feel a certain way, but should you refuse to grow because you feel? Sometimes what we feel is not based on objective reality, that's why it is called a "feeling". For an example: I can say that I love spinach and artichoke dip, I think it's tasty, and there's no real argument to be had, because that is a clearly subjective matter, but were I to try and represent that opinion as an objective fact, everyone is going to take the piss out of me on it, and they should. There is no excuse for trying to pass off subjective opinion as objective fact in a debate.

[logroller]

Thank you for showing me this. I'm going to have read it repeatedly. I think I make similar mistakes in debate. I'm rather slow on debate. I'm not stupid person, but I'm not skilled at this at all.

This sentence particularly interests me:

Eventually she changed her topic, she just couldn't argue against Islamic countries, nor could she bring herself to argue that no one was forced.

So, actually she was in a bind. She couldn't argue against Islamic countries, more than likely out of family loyalty, and as an American, she could not bring herself to admit that the dress is forced to a large extent.

At least, that's my best guess. This is pretty interesting.

Debate is as much art as science. Persuasion is an artform which utilizes a bunch of techniques. Ethos, pathos and logos are perhaps the most common classifications for persuasive speech. Repetition, for example, employs the pathos of the audience-- gets them vested into argument because it's consistent. Ethos engages the audience's sense of right and wrong. An example of ethical persuasion would be the use of words which carry strong emotions. Eg mlk saying '...judged by the content of their character, which if you recall, was used with contrast; similarly, JFK with ask not...

The last, logos, is thw logical side of argument. This is something which I think you should focus upon. Try arguing the counterpoints to your own position. Sometimes you may even concede on one point, but don't let that distract from your overall argument. The goal is to convince the audience of your overall position, and by demonstrating flexibility, you gain the audience's confidence in you and thus, your position.

[Wind Song]

Debate is as much art as science. Persuasion is an artform which utilizes a bunch of techniques. Ethos, pathos and logos are perhaps the most common classifications for persuasive speech. Repetition, for example, employs the pathos of the audience-- gets them vested into argument because it's consistent. Ethos engages the audience's sense of right and wrong. An example of ethical persuasion would be the use of words which carry strong emotions. Eg mlk saying '...judged by the content of their character, which if you recall, was used with contrast; similarly, JFK with ask not...

The last, logos, is thw logical side of argument. This is something which I think you should focus upon. Try arguing the counterpoints to your own position. Sometimes you may even concede on one point, but don't let that distract from your overall argument. The goal is to convince the audience of your overall position, and by demonstrating flexibility, you gain the audience's confidence in you and thus, your position.

Great post. Completely non-judgemental, unlike the DS post which has a "scolding", put down tone, IMO. It's much easier for me to incorporate feedback when it's presented in a positive light. That's my committment of what I plan to attend to.

[logroller]

The problem is, however, that many times, you have been the instigator of the name calling, then become irate about names being thrown back. You have to show respect to earn it in return.

You may feel a certain way, but should you refuse to grow because you feel? Sometimes what we feel is not based on objective reality, that's why it is called a "feeling". For an example: I can say that I love spinach and artichoke dip, I think it's tasty, and there's no real argument to be had, because that is a clearly subjective matter, but were I to try and represent that opinion as an objective fact, everyone is going to take the piss out of me on it, and they should. There is no excuse for trying to pass off subjective opinion as objective fact in a debate.

I like the taste of spinach and artichoke dip, but I don't like the texture. indeed it is a subjective feeling, but it nonetheless possesses objective traits which can be critically analyzed. To discuss the counterpoint I might consider the preparation; that maybe I had a dip that wasn't adequately chopped for not only my liking, but perhapsothers too. This would be an appeal to the audience's feelings which may be similar, which gains me their confidence; also, since i explained why I didn't like it without insulting those who do like the dip, I haven't alienated that group. Win/win

[ConHog]

I like the taste of spinach and artichoke dip, but I don't like the texture. indeed it is a subjective feeling, but it nonetheless possesses objective traits which can be critically analyzed. To discuss the counterpoint I might consider the preparation; that maybe I had a dip that wasn't adequately chopped for not only my liking, but perhapsothers too. This would be an appeal to the audience's feelings which may be similar, which gains me their confidence; also, since i explained why I didn't like it without insulting those who do like the dip, I haven't alienated that group. Win/win

anyone who doesn't like spinach and artichoke dip is a freak and an idiot

[Wind Song]

Spoken just like the love we expect from our friend CH.