Debate : Debating

**DanB** · 11-17-2004, 10:08 PM

Ah a mass debate

**DanB** · 11-17-2004, 10:21 PM

Handy that cos I do think its a good idea.

When I was at school we used to have to do it in our English class, I used to quite enjoy it

**NikkiD** · 11-17-2004, 10:21 PM

I apologize for the repeated use of the word "one" but to say "he" all the time is to assume that all involved will always be male. Last time I checked, I was in possession of body parts which would make that statement untrue. However, for the sake of the argument, I shall use "he" for easier reading.

How can you compare football to debating?

When someone trains for a sport, they learn as much as possible. The more skills one learns, the better he will be at the game. There is no bias involved.

In debating, yes, it is important to learn all you can about a subject. It is possible for a person to expand their understanding of a topic without arguing against his own views on that topic.

**Jon L. Obscene** · 11-17-2004, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by NikkiD

When someone trains for a sport, they learn as much as possible. The more skills one learns, the better he will be at the game.

Thats it right there, you proved my point for me , Thank you.

There is no bias involved.

Not true, how can you say a sportsman is not biased? Of course he/she

is, biased to their own team.

In debating, yes, it is important to learn all you can about a subject. It is possible for a person to expand their understanding of a topic without arguing against his own views on that topic.

Again, very true.
My point is that arguing against yourself as well as others will harden your mind.
Let me give you an analogy

If you play an acoustic guitar for 3 hours, then pick up an electric, you will find the electric seems easier than normal to play. this is due to the wieght and tension of string difference between the 2.

This thread is the acoustic guitar, arguing not only against others, but against yourself.
When the real debate happens it will be the electric guitar, it will seem easier and lighter to take part in because you will have "Over hardened" your mind.

Side effects of this could be big headedness.

Jonno

**DanB** · 11-17-2004, 10:50 PM

**NikkiD** · 11-17-2004, 10:54 PM

Thats it right there, you proved my point for me , Thank you.

No, I didn't. I simply stated that the more skills a person aquires, the better they will be at a sport. That doesn't prove or disprove either points. There is no bias involved to learning skills. No opinion, no argument, just training your body to perform something.

Not true, how can you say a sportsman is not biased? Of course he/she

is, biased to their own team.

And when they are traded to a different team? Skills they have are transferrable, no matter what team they play for. There is no bias in being able to score a goal, no matter who you score it for.

Again, very true.
My point is that arguing against yourself as well as others will harden your mind.
Let me give you an analogy

If you play an acoustic guitar for 3 hours, then pick up an electric, you will find the electric seems easier than normal to play. this is due to the wieght and tension of string difference between the 2.

This thread is the acoustic guitar, arguing not only against others, but against yourself.
When the real debate happens it will be the electric guitar, it will seem easier and lighter to take part in because you will have "Over hardened" your mind.

Side effects of this could be big headedness.

Again, you can quite easily learn the opposing viewpoint without arguing for it.

To use your analogy, you're more likely to give up the guitar lessons altogether if you're not playing music you like.

If you argue for something you believe in, you are more likely to stick with the debate. If you argue something you don't believe in, you're likely to walk away. Walking away doesn't hone the skill of debate.

**Arm** · 11-17-2004, 10:57 PM

I wish we could all have a debate without the use of ad hominem.

**Jon L. Obscene** · 11-17-2004, 11:04 PM

No, I didn't. I simply stated that the more skills a person aquires, the better they will be at a sport. That doesn't prove or disprove either points. There is no bias involved to learning skills. No opinion, no argument, just training your body to perform something.

And I believe that is what this is. Gathering and honing skills.

And when they are traded to a different team? Skills they have are transferrable, no matter what team they play for. There is no bias in being able to score a goal, no matter who you score it for.

Then they will be loyal and biased to that team.
I could change my mind half way thru a debate and recognise I am wrong, then swop sides and use my skills for that opinion/side.

Again, you can quite easily learn the opposing viewpoint without arguing for it.

I agree, you have made some very interesting and valid points which I have taken on board.
I don't recall saying you could'nt learn without arguing.

To use your analogy, you're more likely to give up the guitar lessons altogether if you're not playing music you like.

lol, now you know you don't wanna be getting me started on that

And I will now prove my point of this debate by saying I dissagree, if you have the passion there and want it bad enough, you will do whatever it takes.

If you argue for something you believe in, you are more likely to stick with the debate. If you argue something you don't believe in, you're likely to walk away. Walking away doesn't hone the skill of debate.

I don't recall denying that either, that is correct.
What I am saying is a debate like this is a good training ground, being given a position to defend will test your strength to hold an argument simply because it's there to be held.

Jonno