Ways people may "play unfair" at debates

[PoetPhilosopher]

I'm talking besides some very common Logical Fallacy examples.

Here's some that I've got off the top of my head:

1. Talking about two sides in a debate, talking your side up, then saying that "If you believe the other side, I have a bridge to sell you." or saying "If you actually believe the other side, I have some snake oil to sell you." when the other side (may) have the more logical arguments.

2. Realizing that it often takes much more energy to debunk than to bring up new points, the debater brings up easily debunked points relentlessly, realizing that people may not be able to debunk them all or have the time or patience to.

3. Bringing up a subject so obscure almost no one knows it, and trying to become an "expert" in it, then using slight know-how from that field to create fallacious arguments catered to your ideas on something else, with the hopes no one will be able to debunk them on that other thing.

4. Making people watch extremely long YouTube videos, or read a book, before they can "refute your argument" on what you state are "your terms".

5. Talking basic science and basic biology up like they are the whole of science, or the whole of biology, or even trying to convince people that they cover all the same things as extensive, peer-reviewed science and "advanced biology", or are somehow philosophically better than "advanced biology" or extensive, peer-reviewed science on the matter.

That being said...

I don't really make the best one-on-one debater because I start to consider the other's feelings as we talk, and even if I do believe that I could be right, or could have the better arguments, I determine it not really worth it, and would rather let people have their personal autonomy. And honestly, that's a bit more important to me than "keeping the score", which means when it comes to debates... yeah, I'm probably a loser, even when the debate terms are "fair". Lol.

 

[Quintessence]

5. Talking basic science and basic biology up like they are the whole of science, or the whole of biology, or even trying to convince people that they cover all the same things as extensive, peer-reviewed science and "advanced biology", or are somehow philosophically better than "advanced biology" or extensive, peer-reviewed science on the matter.

I have a hard time faulting anyone for that.

When reflecting on how my own educational experience went, for most of it basic science classes simply were taught like they were foundational - that is that and this is how it is sort of thing. It isn't revealed that the curriculum is simplified down for age-appropriateness until you get into more advanced studies. This isn't just the case in the sciences, but it has a particularly troublesome impact in those disciplines, perhaps?

The more you learn, the stupider you feel.

Or is that just me?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I have a hard time faulting anyone for that.

When reflecting on how my own educational experience went, for most of it basic science classes simply were taught like they were foundational - that is that and this is how it is sort of thing. It isn't revealed that the curriculum is simplified down for age-appropriateness until you get into more advanced studies. This isn't just the case in the sciences, but it has a particularly troublesome impact in those disciplines, perhaps?

The more you learn, the stupider you feel.

Or is that just me?

I think you get more knowledge on the topic, but realise the boundaries of the topic are much larger than suspected. A bigger slice of an even bigger pie.

But Terry Pratchett used a term called 'lies to children' somewhat specifically talking about the transmission of a science knowledge to kids. Basically suggested that teachers lie when transmitting knowledge making science sound more like facts, and more accessible than it actually is.

He gave an example about what kids 'know' about rainbows, how that develops, but how it's technically wrong at basically every step.

His point was around the power and importance of narrative, from memory.