3 ms·

Notably both of these countries are english majority. I went looking for german debate clubs and found that we have some, but also that they're relatively young

Notably both of these countries are english majority. I went looking for german debate clubs and found that we have some, but also that they're relatively young (the national debating org in germany was formed only in 2001), and were mainly formed based on inspiration by the english language sphere. I'm also curious what exactly you mean with civil discourse? I don't know which style you're referring to, but i've seen people who cared primarily about discourse being "polite", even if the most horrible ideas were being presented as valid.

BrandoElFollito 9y ago
I checked the same for France and they are a few but this is not something common. There are debates at law schools (horrible exercise of corporatism favoritism, having attended to a few of them) though.
_dps 9y ago
There are many norms of civil discourse represented in debating traditions, but there is substantial variation. Still, two that are enforced in all formal debate I know are: 1) all participants have equal access to present their views, usually uninterrupted for at least some portion of time 2) all participants have equal access to rebut their opponent's views, so neither side has an opportunity to present an uncontested idea These are important norms to keep more powerful, obnoxious, or charismatic people from having (as much) undue advantage in the contest of ideas. I see these formal characteristics as orthogonal to whether someone has horrible views. Without guarantees of this kind you may find yourself on the wrong side of a power imbalance, and then you have no right to challenge said ideas in a fair contest.
- walshemj 9y ago
  Normaly there are rules of debate the main ones are All debates are to a propesed motion. Motion must make sense. Time limits on speach for all participants. Debaters must speak to the motion. Pious motions normaly ruled out of order No wreaking amendmenst are acepted. No non relevent amendments.

BrandoElFollito 9y ago

I checked the same for France and they are a few but this is not something common. There are debates at law schools (horrible exercise of corporatism favoritism, having attended to a few of them) though.

_dps 9y ago

There are many norms of civil discourse represented in debating traditions, but there is substantial variation. Still, two that are enforced in all formal debate I know are: 1) all participants have equal access to present their views, usually uninterrupted for at least some portion of time 2) all participants have equal access to rebut their opponent's views, so neither side has an opportunity to present an uncontested idea These are important norms to keep more powerful, obnoxious, or charismatic people from having (as much) undue advantage in the contest of ideas. I see these formal characteristics as orthogonal to whether someone has horrible views. Without guarantees of this kind you may find yourself on the wrong side of a power imbalance, and then you have no right to challenge said ideas in a fair contest.

walshemj 9y ago
Normaly there are rules of debate the main ones are All debates are to a propesed motion. Motion must make sense. Time limits on speach for all participants. Debaters must speak to the motion. Pious motions normaly ruled out of order No wreaking amendmenst are acepted. No non relevent amendments.