Are you a great debater?

[Ouroboros]

At 56, I can't even trust myself to read straight anymore, let alone reason straight.

That's another annoying thing I find with myself... reading comprehension f-ups.

Reading. Responding with "aargh! Yu so stupid! I'm rite. U so wrong it ain't right! Blah!"

...

"Oh. Wait... sorry... I read it wrong..." *doh*

 

[Ouroboros]

I'm okay, I guess. I much rather prefer civil discussion over debate.

U WRONG!

Let's debate this, right now! I'm rite, ya now!

(j/k of course)

 

[Ouroboros]

And, of course, wehn you retract or correct, the other person will implicitly or directly make that seem like your entire argument is invalid.

You speled "wenh" wrong!!!

 

[Sunstone]

Yes, but they're usually thinking about what nasty thing they'd like to say to or about me.

I'll certainly grant the gratitude some folks might eventually feel towards your terse correction of their views is very likely proceeded by a primaeval scream.

 

[Penumbra]

But here's where we might disagree, Falv: I've learned so much from you and the other reasonably honest and informed debaters that I think you might be overlooking the value of debates to those who are lurking, rather than participating.

^That's the philosophy I operate on.

Rather than focusing on changing one member's mind about something, if I'm debating someone, I'm exploring issues primary for an audience. That's where I believe the larger impact is.

The secondary impact is that many people do change their views from debates, but they rarely do so on the spot. A seed is planted, and when the heat is off and the ego is not attacked, a particularly coherent argument may stick with them and, combined with other observations or knowledge, change their views eventually.

 

[Debater Slayer]

^That's the philosophy I operate on.

Rather than focusing on changing one member's mind about something, if I'm debating someone, I'm exploring issues primary for an audience. That's where I believe the larger impact is.

The secondary impact is that many people do change their views from debates, but they rarely do so on the spot. A seed is planted, and when the heat is off and the ego is not attacked, a particularly coherent argument may stick with them and, combined with other observations or knowledge, change their views eventually.

I can attest that your posts have done this at least once.

 

[Riverwolf]

Yes, but they're usually thinking about what nasty thing they'd like to say to or about me.

For what it's worth, your terse responses have helped me learn how to think. ^_^

 

[Riverwolf]

You speled "wenh" wrong!!!

Maybe I'm not saying "when"! Maybe I'm actually using the word "wenh"!

 

[Riverwolf]

^That's the philosophy I operate on.

Rather than focusing on changing one member's mind about something, if I'm debating someone, I'm exploring issues primary for an audience. That's where I believe the larger impact is.

The secondary impact is that many people do change their views from debates, but they rarely do so on the spot. A seed is planted, and when the heat is off and the ego is not attacked, a particularly coherent argument may stick with them and, combined with other observations or knowledge, change their views eventually.

That's happened to me on a few occasions.

 

[Slapstick]

Yes, but to quit beating around the bush, are you any good at debating?

My debate skills will make bushes sway and trees fall over.

 

[LuisDantas]

^That's the philosophy I operate on.

Rather than focusing on changing one member's mind about something, if I'm debating someone, I'm exploring issues primary for an audience. That's where I believe the larger impact is.

The secondary impact is that many people do change their views from debates, but they rarely do so on the spot. A seed is planted, and when the heat is off and the ego is not attacked, a particularly coherent argument may stick with them and, combined with other observations or knowledge, change their views eventually.

Makes a lot of sense. People in a debate may (not always) be respectful to each other, but they are rarely all that open to changing their minds due to the other side's arguments. It is rare enough for them to truly understand those arguments, much less accept them as valid, to say nothing of compelling.

Someone not directly involved might however enjoy a better understanding and benefit. I believe that it is indeed the larger part of the overall benefit.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Man, a chance to assess myself! How did I miss this thread earlier!!

I'd vote myself as somewhere around the 'I'm an alright debater'. I think if the topic is in my sphere and I have sufficient time RL, I can compose a pretty good argument, and I can do it formally or informally. I prefer informally...more fun that way.
I'd also give myself points for actually listening to the other party/parties, and responding. I'll occasionally misunderstand, but I don't ignore the uncomfortable bits. Makes no sense to, since I'm here to learn (and tweak Sterling Archer's giblets when given the chance).

Interestingly, I'm a reasonable debater in RL (again, not great, but decent), but I'd go about composing my arguments in an entirely different manner. One thing that happens here is that people can fact check, and swamp an argument with links to hour long You Tube videos. RL, succinctness is important. Believe it or not, I can create a succint and coherant argument when I need to. Just amuses me to think other people out there are trawling through my drivel.

If anyone wants my opinion on their debating skills, let me know. I can't guarantee accuracy, but I CAN guarantee I'll make it up.

 

[Riverwolf]

I think I can come up with a pretty good metric for measuring someone's debating skill: can you effectively debate in favor of something you personally disagree with?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I think I can come up with a pretty good metric for measuring someone's debating skill: can you effectively debate in favor of something you personally disagree with?

Good point. This was kind of a fundamental in learning how to debate in the first place. I used to get my primary school kids to debate topics where they randomly were given a 'side'.

They learnt a LOT by debating the negative.
Maybe I should try and formulate an argument proving the existence of a higher power?

 

[Riverwolf]

Good point. This was kind of a fundamental in learning how to debate in the first place. I used to get my primary school kids to debate topics where they randomly were given a 'side'.

They learnt a LOT by debating the negative.
Maybe I should try and formulate an argument proving the existence of a higher power?

Might be a good exercise. Sadly, I was never given a debate class while growing up, and pretty much failed every debate I was put in.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I think I can come up with a pretty good metric for measuring someone's debating skill: can you effectively debate in favor of something you personally disagree with?

I've offered to take either side in a debate, only to be accused of trolling and general insincerity.

But I'll take either side in the debate over whether I'm trolling.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Every reasonable person knows I'm right whether they admit it or not. I don't need their agreement to know this fundamental fact.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I stink at it. I can't access all of my knowledge on a subject, as I get emotional and ill at ease when confronted. My husband, on the other hand, is amazing at it. I defer to him whenever possible.

 

[Secret Chief]

Just amuses me to think other people out there are trawling through my drivel.

Actually, no one does.

 

[LuisDantas]

I think I can come up with a pretty good metric for measuring someone's debating skill: can you effectively debate in favor of something you personally disagree with?

I don't think I can, or even want to try. I guess I am a complete disaster as a debater then.