Debate

[Nevafrost]

Well, you see, I was in the debating club in our school. I was actually considered a very good debater. So, I was selected as the team leader from the very first audition. I was pretty sincere about it at first. I would spend a lot of time in writing my scripts, studying the motion etc. But then suddenly I just started not-liking debating (school/uni debate). I just had a feeling that it’s not right. Look, they will give me a motion for debate and assign which side I’ll take, doesn't matter if I WANT to debate on this side or not. Sometimes the topics were so ridiculous, like, they would even select a universal truth for the topic and ask me to debate against it. It's unreasonable for me. I felt pressured from the lies I told myself to debate for the sake of my team. On the other hand, irl debates are all cool. You can argue on whichever side you take on. I feel a lot comfortable arguing over something I believe in. Thank god I quit it.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Isn't this how "pro" debates are? You don't pick a side.

 

[Nevafrost]

Isn't this how "pro" debates are? You don't pick a side.

Idk about that. But, in my country, school or uni level debates are all like that. You don't get to pick a side in this. This sucks the most

 

[AnonUnlimited]

The purpose of debate isn't to be passionate about any side, it's about trying to learn the arguments of a either side to grasp a better understanding of it.

The reason why people argue and debate is because they can't come to an agreement or compromise, or perhaps one side is muddle headed and can't see objectivity. The purpose of debate is to learn, not to win.

However, debating and objectivity isn't easy, especially if you have strong feelings about one side or another.
Still, props for trying it out. It's a good learning experience.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Idk about that. But, in my country, school or uni level debates are all like that. You don't get to pick a side in this. This sucks the most

I'm not sure myself. I heard it from some YT video or maybe I read it somewhere. "Pro" debate is not defending the side you like, but using proper tools. You practice rhetoric rather than doing what Anon said. What anon said, or when people defend something they hold dear during a debate, is a non-pro debate. But again, I'm not sure. If I am wrong, correct me.

 

[LilRora]

Personally, I have never liked any kinds of debates. They all feel extremely artificial to me, how they are structured and managed, and more a show for less educated audience than a learning experience. I'm more partial to interviews, or free discussion.

The issue with assigned sides is a whole another thing. I've had that experience many times in school (not only in debates, but also other exercises) and it's a bit complicated, but overall I think it's a losing scenario on either end.

On one hand, you can say that it's a really good tool for learning. If you don't have much knowledge on the subject, it lets you learn from the other side of the debate while challenging their claims with the immediate doubts that arise in your mind. If you know a bit more, it allows you to broaden your horizons. Then, trying to come up with reasons why something is good or bad while you have a developed opinion forces you to think outside your inherently biased view on the matter.

On the flipside, realistically, that's not really how it works out in most cases. If you don't have much knowledge in the matter, you're generally useless in the debate. If you have a strong, developed opinion, you've most likely thought about the issue long enough from multiple sides and you don't need anyone to challenge your beliefs.

Personally I think the only scenario where this can be useful is when people with similar interests meet with each other, say, a group of scientists in a particular field that discuss some subject and exchange their theories and findings - but then you don't need a formal debate.

Another problem is that forcing this onto people - what schools typically do - is statistically unlikely and realistically not going to result in that last scenario. To have a real debate, you need people invested in a subject and open for discussion - those are few and far between.

 

[TheEldritchGod]

Idk about that. But, in my country, school or uni level debates are all like that. You don't get to pick a side in this. This sucks the most

You'd be a terrible lawyer.

Personally I think the only scenario where this can be useful is when people with similar interests meet with each other, say, a group of scientists in a particular field that discuss some subject and exchange their theories and findings - but then you don't need a formal debate.

Or, a court room.

 

[owotrucked]

Spending time to think and reason about thing you don't care about is peak masochism.

Congrats you reached a milestone in your journey of self discovery

 

[LilRora]

Or, a court room.

Actually, yeah. This is a pretty good example, though I initially skipped it because I was primarily considering education and learning.

 

[Nevafrost]

You'd be a terrible lawyer.

I know that and I take pride in that. Because, I think I'm now able to decide for myself what is right and what's not.

The purpose of debate isn't to be passionate about any side, it's about trying to learn the arguments of a either side to grasp a better understanding of it.

The reason why people argue and debate is because they can't come to an agreement or compromise, or perhaps one side is muddle headed and can't see objectivity. The purpose of debate is to learn, not to win.

However, debating and objectivity isn't easy, especially if you have strong feelings about one side or another.
Still, props for trying it out. It's a good learning experience.

I learnt about the things you said after starting debate. And, I hate to do it, so I quit. That's all.

Personally, I have never liked any kinds of debates. They all feel extremely artificial to me, how they are structured and managed, and more a show for less educated audience than a learning experience. I'm more partial to interviews, or free discussion.

The issue with assigned sides is a whole another thing. I've had that experience many times in school (not only in debates, but also other exercises) and it's a bit complicated, but overall I think it's a losing scenario on either end.

On one hand, you can say that it's a really good tool for learning. If you don't have much knowledge on the subject, it lets you learn from the other side of the debate while challenging their claims with the immediate doubts that arise in your mind. If you know a bit more, it allows you to broaden your horizons. Then, trying to come up with reasons why something is good or bad while you have a developed opinion forces you to think outside your inherently biased view on the matter.

On the flipside, realistically, that's not really how it works out in most cases. If you don't have much knowledge in the matter, you're generally useless in the debate. If you have a strong, developed opinion, you've most likely thought about the issue long enough from multiple sides and you don't need anyone to challenge your beliefs.

Personally I think the only scenario where this can be useful is when people with similar interests meet with each other, say, a group of scientists in a particular field that discuss some subject and exchange their theories and findings - but then you don't need a formal debate.

Another problem is that forcing this onto people - what schools typically do - is statistically unlikely and realistically not going to result in that last scenario. To have a real debate, you need people invested in a subject and open for discussion - those are few and far between.

When I said irl debate, I meant discussion or a argument irl. I do think that every issue has its own pros and cons. So, I don't like biased debates at all.

Spending time to think and reason about thing you don't care about is peak masochism.

Congrats you reached a milestone in your journey of self discovery

Thanks?

 

[owotrucked]

Thanks?

Tbh I feel like it sucks when you start something with high hope and get fulfillment from it, only to realize after a while that it's not just your thing. It's almost a depressing grief of a lost opportunity and a regret of wasting time.

I feel like self discovery is mostly through negative space, where you discover what you're not, in order to indirectly learn about yourself. There are so much shit that Ive felt I wasted time on and feel frustrated about. Yet without experiencing things first, I wouldnt be able to stand where I am

You deserve a cookie as a reward for your journey

 

[MatchaChocolate69]

Putting yourself in the point of view of something you don't believe in is actually quite useful for broadening your horizons. It's especially helpful for improving as a writer because it helps you create more believable characters that are different from yourself.

 

[LilRora]

When I said irl debate, I meant discussion or a argument irl. I do think that every issue has its own pros and cons. So, I don't like biased debates at all.

Yep, this is another important thing. A lot of times, arguing whether something is good or not is foolish - like trying to argue that smartphones are bad. They are good in some ways and bad in other aspects, and they cannot balance each other out in an easy way.

Also, a bit of advice, if you quote or reply to or mention someone when editing your post, they won't get notified. I think this also happens when posts merge. I can guess you did that cause I didn't get a notification.

 

[TheEldritchGod]

I know that and I take pride in that. Because, I think I'm now able to decide for myself what is right and what's not.

You just said that you decide what is right and wrong without research. You "know" what is right and screw anyone else.
They moment you assume you know everything, you fail. Arguing for a position you know is wrong is what you have to do to learn how to figure out what is wrong.

It is called STEELMANNING. Instead of building a strawman and arguing with that, you build the best possible argument for your opponent, and then you try and tear THAT DOWN. I do it all the time. Why? Because MAYBE I'm WRONG. If I make the best possible argument for what I oppose, I just might find out I was wrong.

You?

You are more concerned with being right than being correct. The difference is, if you are "right" you win the argument. But you can be correct and lose an argument. People like you have a problem with things called "facts" and tend to get rid of them because you are uncomfortable with losing. I would rather know the truth than be "right".

Do you know as a prosecutor, your job includes handing over evidence to the defendant that helps their case? Your goal isn't to convict someone but to CONVICT THE GUILTY.

That's why I say you'd be a terrible lawyer. You'd make up your mind who's guilty and who's innocent and if in the middle of your case you found out you were wrong, you just might cover that evidence up so you don't ruin your Win-Loss ratio.

Getting to the truth isn't easy, or comfortable, but I'd rather find out I was wrong and learn the truth than "win" by proving I was "right".

 

[owotrucked]

You just said that you decide what is right and wrong without research.

I believe that Nevafrost didnt specify her method to decide what's right and wrong, but you made the assumption that this process happens without research.

In fact, it's implied that the debate club taught her various process through the exercise of debate.

I think the underlying point of her complain was that debate for the sake of debate can only be so interesting until you got a general picture of the art. Afterwards, the exercise of debate while defending sides that you disagree with would be rightfully annoying.

On the other hand, using debate as her tool to communicate her opinion is more pleasing to her.

Academic exercise was always meant to be a stepping stool for greater height. Would you rather enjoy solving random abstract equations in a math handbook or cook booba physics equations solver?

 

[Nevafrost]

Tbh I feel like it sucks when you start something with high hope and get fulfillment from it, only to realize after a while that it's not just your thing. It's almost a depressing grief of a lost opportunity and a regret of wasting time.

I feel like self discovery is mostly through negative space, where you discover what you're not, in order to indirectly learn about yourself. There are so much shit that Ive felt I wasted time on and feel frustrated about. Yet without experiencing things first, I wouldnt be able to stand where I am

You deserve a cookie as a reward for your journey

Haha, thanks again for the cookie. Actually, as I said, I was a pretty good debater. But, as I lost interest in it, I just can't debate like before. Though, I'm not upset about it.

You just said that you decide what is right and wrong without research. You "know" what is right and screw anyone else.
They moment you assume you know everything, you fail. Arguing for a position you know is wrong is what you have to do to learn how to figure out what is wrong.

It is called STEELMANNING. Instead of building a strawman and arguing with that, you build the best possible argument for your opponent, and then you try and tear THAT DOWN. I do it all the time. Why? Because MAYBE I'm WRONG. If I make the best possible argument for what I oppose, I just might find out I was wrong.

You?

You are more concerned with being right than being correct. The difference is, if you are "right" you win the argument. But you can be correct and lose an argument. People like you have a problem with things called "facts" and tend to get rid of them because you are uncomfortable with losing. I would rather know the truth than be "right".

Do you know as a prosecutor, your job includes handing over evidence to the defendant that helps their case? Your goal isn't to convict someone but to CONVICT THE GUILTY.

That's why I say you'd be a terrible lawyer. You'd make up your mind who's guilty and who's innocent and if in the middle of your case you found out you were wrong, you just might cover that evidence up so you don't ruin your Win-Loss ratio.

Getting to the truth isn't easy, or comfortable, but I'd rather find out I was wrong and learn the truth than "win" by proving I was "right".

Whoever said that I want to WIN? Look, I never lost a debate, so the urge to win a debate was never my intention. And, I fully agree with what owotrucked said. May be I didn’t express my words well. What I meant by saying that I can decide for myself was that now my school doesn’t decide what side I'll take on. And, how did you decide that I don't research anything before an argument? I'm not some foolish to think I know everything. But, now what I cherish is the independence. Or, do you like the society or school(in my case) to decide for yourself?

Also, I kinda agree with what you said. I do think that I'm the type of person who will abandon her client in the middle of an ongoing case if I ever get to know that he was the criminal. I think that makes me a terrible lawyer.

Yep, this is another important thing. A lot of times, arguing whether something is good or not is foolish - like trying to argue that smartphones are bad. They are good in some ways and bad in other aspects, and they cannot balance each other out in an easy way.

Also, a bit of advice, if you quote or reply to or mention someone when editing your post, they won't get notified. I think this also happens when posts merge. I can guess you did that cause I didn't get a notification.

@LilRora So, what should I do then?

 

[Aaqil]

@LilRora

So, what

should

I do

then?

Say everything in one post,

 

[Nevafrost]

Say everything in one post,

Wha- You mean I should reply to them together? I don't understand

 

[Anemic_Vampire]

School debates? We had one of those at our old school, it was basically boys vs girls showdown. Honestly, it was a little awkward, because no one raised any point at all. We just stared at each other, and nodded whenever someone said something. Then, I had many ideas about the topic after reaching my home.

 

[Nevafrost]

School debates? We had one of those at our old school, it was basically boys vs girls showdown. Honestly, it was a little awkward, because no one raised any point at all. We just stared at each other, and nodded whenever someone said something. Then, I had many ideas about the topic after reaching my home.

Haha, it happens when there’s a debate in the classroom. But, the club activities are kinda hard.