3 ms·
I think the fundamental problem is nobody does formal debates with rules and moderators (who actually do their job). Its not like falacious arguments and bad f
by bawolff 1y ago
I think the fundamental problem is nobody does formal debates with rules and moderators (who actually do their job).
Its not like falacious arguments and bad faith rhetoric is a new phenomenon. They've been with us since the beginning of time. They are problems we have solutions to.
- hacknewslogin 1y agoYou might find Cambridge union to be refreshing. https://www.youtube.com/@cambridgeunionsoc1815 https://www.youtube.com/@cambridgeunionsoc1815
- xg15 1y agoWith fair rules and moderators. Political talk shows in German TV almost always have a moderator, yet they rarely intervene when people cut each other off or talk over each other - but they will immediately if a person takes too long to elaborate their point or touches subjects that are scheduled for a later part of the show. That kind of moderation encourages bad-faith behavior instead of preventing it.
- AlexandrB 1y agoI think Jubilee and Munk Debates try to do this. The problem is that a super formal debate like what you're suggesting might be quite dry and boring for most people to watch so it wouldn't get a lot of viewership.
- bawolff 1y agoTrue, which is the fundamental problem - people like bad faith debate a lot more than good faith. The issue isn't that people engage in it, but that the crowds eat it up.