3 ms·

> Arguing is a form of truth seeking behavior. Arguing is a form of correctness defending behavior. I have found the most correct position, and I will now def

by csours 3y ago

> Arguing is a form of truth seeking behavior. Arguing is a form of correctness defending behavior. I have found the most correct position, and I will now defend it. I challenge you to prove that I am not doing this. ---- I have a t-shirt from a media organization that says "I stand with the facts". I like the shirt and the saying. I think facts are very important; but people experience the world in narrative format. Debate is a way to tell a story. It's a story where you're supposed to keep more than one point of view in mind. I do think that's very useful. However, when it comes to solving problems, I do not think it is very useful. The debater who uses half truths and shifts the subject before they can be pinned down can be very convincing to the audience, even while the judges see through the tricks.

vorpalhex 3y ago
> I have found the most correct position, and I will now defend it. I challenge you to prove that I am not doing this. What evidence could I provide that would change your mind? If you can point to some kind of evidence (group study above X p value, double blind study, expert opinion, etc) then we are having a proper debate. If one of the candidates can't list some criteria that would make them update their position, then we are not debating we are proslytizing. Tools only work when you don't abuse them. That they can be gamed doesn't make them not effective, it just means you need to realize that they can be gamed.
- csours 3y ago
  I agree. > proper debate. Unfortunately, only True Scotsmen can have Proper Debates. > Tools only work when you don't abuse them. I agree. The point of the parent article is that debate is being abused by kritik. My point is that debate has many weaknesses besides kritik. > it just means you need to realize that they can be gamed. I have to expand on this - you, me, and the rest of the audience need to realize that it can be gamed, and how, and we need to notice when it is being gamed.

by csours 3y ago

vorpalhex 3y ago

> I have found the most correct position, and I will now defend it. I challenge you to prove that I am not doing this. What evidence could I provide that would change your mind? If you can point to some kind of evidence (group study above X p value, double blind study, expert opinion, etc) then we are having a proper debate. If one of the candidates can't list some criteria that would make them update their position, then we are not debating we are proslytizing. Tools only work when you don't abuse them. That they can be gamed doesn't make them not effective, it just means you need to realize that they can be gamed.

csours 3y ago
I agree. > proper debate. Unfortunately, only True Scotsmen can have Proper Debates. > Tools only work when you don't abuse them. I agree. The point of the parent article is that debate is being abused by kritik. My point is that debate has many weaknesses besides kritik. > it just means you need to realize that they can be gamed. I have to expand on this - you, me, and the rest of the audience need to realize that it can be gamed, and how, and we need to notice when it is being gamed.