Tips for a nice debate

[Ella S.]

Because it hasn't been proposed to be an objective fact of reality.

I've seen more than one theist say, "It is an objective fact that God is real" word-for-word a few times. Is that just a fringe, minority position? It doesn't seem like one to me.

 

[Heyo]

I've seen more than one theist say, "It is an objective fact that God is real" word-for-word a few times. Is that just a fringe, minority position? It doesn't seem like one to me.

You realize they don't mean it once you ask follow-up questions like "what are scientifically measurable properties of god?". They don't have the same definition of "real" as we do.
And when they really do mean it, those gods are quickly shown to not be existent but theists forget about those and retreat to the gods which can't be falsified.

 

[Ella S.]

You realize they don't mean it once you ask follow-up questions like "what are scientifically measurable properties of god?". They don't have the same definition of "real" as we do.
And when they really do mean it, those gods are quickly shown to not be existent but theists forget about those and retreat to the gods which can't be falsified.

Well, that explains a lot.

 

[JIMMY12345]

Hi guys how are you?
Here I would like to discuss what a nice debate should be. Not only online. In general. Even in real life, if you are a university professor debating with a colleague, or a scholar / expert invited to a TV show.


As you guys know, Socrates used to say that truth can be found through debate. Debate, or Socratic dialogue, is whenever two or more people share their opinions, by claiming what the truth is, until the interlocutor refutes it. But most of the times, there are always at least a couple of aspects they agree on. So even if they mostly disagree at the end of the debate, they have had a fruitful and constructive debate.

I want to suggest some tips.

1) Be nice and use simple language. If your exclusive aim is to impress the interlocutor with your vocabulary and rhetorical skills, and not listening to what the other party has to say, well, that's not a very good start. Try to use shorter sentences and to not dance around concepts If necessary, be blunt about concepts, remaining respectful to your interlocutor.

2) Answer the interlocutor's questions: if you want the interlocutor to answer your questions, answer their questions as well. Mutual respect is about mutual understanding and trust. One question, one answer. One topic at time. Without gish galloping, that is what makes the debate a monologue. And what is to avoid the most is to gaslight your interlocutor, that is expecting the other to answer your question, but not answering theirs. Be disposed to listen, and be patient.

3) Acknowledge. Whenever you realize that you partly agree with what the interlocutor said, do acknowledge that. That may be a start to find an agreement and to find the truth together, through the Socratic method.

4) Never do sealioning: Sealioning is whenever the interlocutor restlessly asks for evidence, because they are absolutely certain of their own truth and want to avoid the debate at any cost. So the only way to do that is to ask for more and more evidence. More locks on the door. In order to avoid equal confrontation.

5) Try to understand the interlocutor's perspective. The interlocutor's mindset is the result of their education, life story, religion, values. Try to see the world the way they see it. And then, use the same terms they use, when possible.

There was a lawyer in court who went on at great length.The exasperated judge explained that there was no need for detailed explanations.He wanted either a simple yes or no.

Lawyer " Sir do you still beat your wife?"