First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
What's the Point Of Debates Here?
8760 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Right here
Offline
Posted 5/25/16
Many people are stupid.
I am one of them but i atleast can admit defeat.
13129 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 5/25/16
There are a few reasons why I debate:
1) Its fun
2) It helps me understand my own point of view and come to my own conclusions while hearing both sides of an argument
3) I may be able to change someone's mind or educate them about something they didn't already know (usually the people outside of the argument)

As for admitting when you are wrong, I think there is an environment where that is easy and an environment where that is difficult. If you are having an open discussion and just chatting, it becomes easy to admit when you are wrong (I remember having a discussion with megahobbit about Kill la Kill where I clearly screwed up one of my points and admitted that I got a little ahead of myself), but when you are debating with someone and they act like this is a war, you give them an inch with "I was wrong about this part" and they often try to take a mile.

As always, I encourage people to debate from a less ideological perspective and a less personal perspective. Talk about ideas, don't insult people for being liberal or conservative. That gets you nowhere.
8495 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/25/16

sundin13 wrote:

There are a few reasons why I debate:
1) Its fun
2) It helps me understand my own point of view and come to my own conclusions while hearing both sides of an argument
3) I may be able to change someone's mind or educate them about something they didn't already know (usually the people outside of the argument)

As for admitting when you are wrong, I think there is an environment where that is easy and an environment where that is difficult. If you are having an open discussion and just chatting, it becomes easy to admit when you are wrong (I remember having a discussion with megahobbit about Kill la Kill where I clearly screwed up one of my points and admitted that I got a little ahead of myself), but when you are debating with someone and they act like this is a war, you give them an inch with "I was wrong about this part" and they often try to take a mile.

As always, I encourage people to debate from a less ideological perspective and a less personal perspective. Talk about ideas, don't insult people for being liberal or conservative. That gets you nowhere.


Ah, I see, people could be upset over the ideological stance of said opening post. In reality, I was parroting the views of the right due to their presence on the forums and the many times which I've seen posts entirely ignored by them making said points in favor of weaker posts which they could easily opposed.
2220 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/25/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

To apologize for a stance that has been thoroughly debunked I feel is a part of learning, and thus is an essential function of debate, because learning is to admit your mistakes and learn from them. To be fair, this is my personal definition of its purpose to me and they do vary. Although if we get into polemics I guess the whole point really is to completely disprove your opponents claims and counterattacks.

Nor did I merely google pop science articles.


To expect an apology, in my eyes, means that you are going about education in the wrong way. You do not ask a student studying physics to apologize for an incorrect equation. You correct them and move on. The fact that you take personal offense to attacks on your stance to the point that you demand a formal apology for challenging you shows your weakness in debate.

And I once again want to state that my initial post was not specifically directed at you or anyone else. In regards to your sources (not that I'm really qualified to evaluate them as my expertise is in history, philosophy, and theology, not psychology or medicine), majority of them appear to be from reputable sources.
8495 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/25/16

mickeydayum wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

To apologize for a stance that has been thoroughly debunked I feel is a part of learning, and thus is an essential function of debate, because learning is to admit your mistakes and learn from them. To be fair, this is my personal definition of its purpose to me and they do vary. Although if we get into polemics I guess the whole point really is to completely disprove your opponents claims and counterattacks.

Nor did I merely google pop science articles.


To expect an apology, in my eyes, means that you are going about education in the wrong way. You do not ask a student studying physics to apologize for an incorrect equation. You correct them and move on. The fact that you take personal offense to attacks on your stance to the point that you demand a formal apology for challenging you shows your weakness in debate.

And I once again want to state that my initial post was not specifically directed at you or anyone else. In regards to your sources (not that I'm really qualified to evaluate them as my expertise is in history, philosophy, and theology, not psychology or medicine), majority of them appear to be from reputable sources.


I didn't mean it that way. I merely expect them to acknowledge the incorrectness of their stance and modify it, rather than keeping it. I'm sorry for being so confusing.
2220 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/25/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I didn't mean it that way. I merely expect them to acknowledge the incorrectness of their stance and modify it, rather than keeping it. I'm sorry for being so confusing. :(


No need to apologize. I don't particularly care in general. Just throwin my two cents in the pot everyone pisses in ya know.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 5/25/16
I don't think apologies have a place in legitimate debate. That only occurs when emotion is introduced. For instance, insulting those of the opposing view. In general, being corrected is something I may thank another for. Being provided new insight is wonderful and can even be addicting.

Arguing on the forum helps consolidate and reconsider my views from a logical standpoint, and address other arguments I perhaps have not considered or mistakenly overlooked (which occurs often). An example of consolidating my argument: http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-949319/social-justice-warrior?pg=0. I enjoy challenging my views. When presented with a better argument I will flip my position, which is why I stay away from most labels these days (as I never quite stick anyhow).

I find it the best way to gauge other people. It's the easiest method of finding exceptional or independently minded individuals. Other times it's just a means of stroking one's ego--especially when presented with those who have not bothered to reason their beliefs and persistently refuse to do so (I find it amusing rather than annoying). There is a respect in disagreement found between those who not only present good reasoning, but acknowledge when they lack it.

Indeed this is not the only platform I use, but I find some individuals here noteworthy and the diversity of opinions, while perhaps not well established, sometimes enlightening. I will often simply take to jest and short quips otherwise.

I have flipped my positions on many issues. My walking along the fence often draws the ire of those that prefer to pick sides--regardless of which side they rest upon.

If you can believe it, my views used to be rather opposite of what they are today, on nearly all matters. Even still I am changing. I will allow the cutting of my head to grow two more.

In the end, better to enjoy yourself.

24563 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/25/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


SugarBombCakes wrote:

I don't see anything in the definition of: debate, relating to or regarding rights and wrongs. Just one's own perspective of: argumentative and on what subject that would/should be. I'm guessing the point of debating is subjective in nature, altogether.

Me. I'm a peacekeeper, and most debates look like a hot mess. So my input means nothing, really.


I feel the point of debate is to learn, exchange ideas, and to remedy your wrongs as necessary. To voice their ideas in a one sided manner while not caring to dissect, and ultimately disprove, their opponents arguments, isn't debate. To cite sources they themselves don't care to check isn't debate. It is merely an obsession with being right rather than to "look like a fool", a sort of confirmation bias that that they crave. It's disgusting and they should be executed with extreme prejudice.


Hey, pot. Kettle here. I have some bad news for you....

8495 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/25/16

outontheop wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


SugarBombCakes wrote:

I don't see anything in the definition of: debate, relating to or regarding rights and wrongs. Just one's own perspective of: argumentative and on what subject that would/should be. I'm guessing the point of debating is subjective in nature, altogether.

Me. I'm a peacekeeper, and most debates look like a hot mess. So my input means nothing, really.


I feel the point of debate is to learn, exchange ideas, and to remedy your wrongs as necessary. To voice their ideas in a one sided manner while not caring to dissect, and ultimately disprove, their opponents arguments, isn't debate. To cite sources they themselves don't care to check isn't debate. It is merely an obsession with being right rather than to "look like a fool", a sort of confirmation bias that that they crave. It's disgusting and they should be executed with extreme prejudice.


Hey, pot. Kettle here. I have some bad news for you....



The difference is, I have facts on my side, while you agreed with Ravenstein on perpetuating a myth using the mid century of global cooling as "evidence" that global warming is highly exaggerated.

24563 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/25/16 , edited 5/25/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


outontheop wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


SugarBombCakes wrote:

I don't see anything in the definition of: debate, relating to or regarding rights and wrongs. Just one's own perspective of: argumentative and on what subject that would/should be. I'm guessing the point of debating is subjective in nature, altogether.

Me. I'm a peacekeeper, and most debates look like a hot mess. So my input means nothing, really.


I feel the point of debate is to learn, exchange ideas, and to remedy your wrongs as necessary. To voice their ideas in a one sided manner while not caring to dissect, and ultimately disprove, their opponents arguments, isn't debate. To cite sources they themselves don't care to check isn't debate. It is merely an obsession with being right rather than to "look like a fool", a sort of confirmation bias that that they crave. It's disgusting and they should be executed with extreme prejudice.


Hey, pot. Kettle here. I have some bad news for you....



The difference is, I have facts on my side, while you agreed with Ravenstein on perpetuating a myth using the mid century of global cooling as "evidence" that global warming is highly exaggerated.



Oh, hey, you seemed to miss the point entirely:

To wit; you are every bit as close-minded as those you think should be "executed with extreme prejudice". More, in fact. I have yet to see you even entertain a notion that did not comfortably conform to you own preconceived notions.

Therefore, in answer to your originally posed (and obnoxiously self-righteous, I may add) question, there *is* no point debating.

I mean, other than poking you and enjoying watching you froth at the mouth.
8495 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/25/16

PrinceJudar wrote:

I don't think apologies have a place in legitimate debate. That only occurs when emotion is introduced. For instance, insulting those of the opposing view. In general, being corrected is something I may thank another for. Being provided new insight is wonderful and can even be addicting.

Arguing on the forum helps consolidate and reconsider my views from a logical standpoint, and address other arguments I perhaps have not considered or mistakenly overlooked (which occurs often). An example of consolidating my argument: http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-949319/social-justice-warrior?pg=0. I enjoy challenging my views. When presented with a better argument I will flip my position, which is why I stay away from most labels these days (as I never quite stick anyhow).

I find it the best way to gauge other people. It's the easiest method of finding exceptional or independently minded individuals. Other times it's just a means of stroking one's ego--especially when presented with those who have not bothered to reason their beliefs and persistently refuse to do so (I find it amusing rather than annoying). There is a respect in disagreement found between those who not only present good reasoning, but acknowledge when they lack it.

Indeed this is not the only platform I use, but I find some individuals here noteworthy and the diversity of opinions, while perhaps not well established, sometimes enlightening. I will often simply take to jest and short quips otherwise.

I have flipped my positions on many issues. My walking along the fence often draws the ire of those that prefer to pick sides--regardless of which side they rest upon.

If you can believe it, my views used to be rather opposite of what they are today, on nearly all matters. Even still I am changing. I will allow the cutting of my head to grow two more.

In the end, better to enjoy yourself.



I guess you're right Prince. It sounds like my opening post aimed to humiliate people into submission, when I wanted people to merely acknowledge the facts. I'm sorry, is my opening post more clear now?
8495 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/25/16 , edited 5/25/16

outontheop wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


outontheop wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


SugarBombCakes wrote:

I don't see anything in the definition of: debate, relating to or regarding rights and wrongs. Just one's own perspective of: argumentative and on what subject that would/should be. I'm guessing the point of debating is subjective in nature, altogether.

Me. I'm a peacekeeper, and most debates look like a hot mess. So my input means nothing, really.


I feel the point of debate is to learn, exchange ideas, and to remedy your wrongs as necessary. To voice their ideas in a one sided manner while not caring to dissect, and ultimately disprove, their opponents arguments, isn't debate. To cite sources they themselves don't care to check isn't debate. It is merely an obsession with being right rather than to "look like a fool", a sort of confirmation bias that that they crave. It's disgusting and they should be executed with extreme prejudice.


Hey, pot. Kettle here. I have some bad news for you....



The difference is, I have facts on my side, while you agreed with Ravenstein on perpetuating a myth using the mid century of global cooling as "evidence" that global warming is highly exaggerated.



Oh, hey, you seemed to miss the point entirely:

To wit; you are every bit as close-minded as those you think should be "executed with extreme prejudice". More, in fact. I have yet to see you even entertain a notion that did not comfortably conform to you own preconceived notions.

Therefore, in answer to your originally posed (and obnoxiously self-righteous, I may add) question, there *is* no point debating.

I mean, other than poking you and enjoying watching you froth at the mouth.

I acknowledge many facts. For example, Maxgale's post about John Hopkins refusing transgender treatment, I acknowledged that and believed for a while that sex reassignment may not be the right option for a great deal of people. I've revised my definition of bigot after hearing HolyDrumstick's argument that he is not a bigot for his stance on the separation of church and state to the point he is pro gay marriage despite his religious beliefs. Other times? I'm not merely convinced.

I also aknowledge some ugly truths, such as the abuse rampant in the LGBT community by LGBT community, and to an extent, race realism (which honestly seems a mixture of chance, genetics, environment, but oh so true.)

I never participated in gun rights thread because honestly, the results seems to be in favor of guns and it took some time for me to accept that maybe VZ68 has a point.
6975 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / The Bottom of the...
Offline
Posted 5/25/16 , edited 5/25/16

Jophar_Vorin wrote:

Many people are stupid.
I am one of them but i atleast can admit defeat.

Same here. I don't like arguing with these people. I sometimes ask myself why am I even here if I have no purpose.

Where does that image come from by the way? I'm really into ancient texts.
16404 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / east coast. Let t...
Offline
Posted 5/25/16
You mean to tell me the debates are here for something other than me looking at them and feeling as dumb as a box of rocks.
I mean. You guys make me feel like I don't know anything about anything..
Who knows? One day a debate will come along and it'll be something I'm an "expert" on.
23493 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/25/16


What's the point of talking in general?

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.