Debating: Pros and Cons

[PolyPride]

I started this topic to discuss the purpose of debating because it appears that many have misconceptions about it, especially when it occurs on this site.

Debate is defined as a discussion between people who hold two opposing views.

Some of the main purposes of debating:
1. To defend your view against objections.
2. To challenge a viewpoint and/or to show that it's wrong.
3. To test your own viewpoint or another person's for strengths and weaknesses.
4. To convince an audience to accept a viewpoint as being valid

To clear some misconceptions:
- If I challenge someone's view, it's not because I dislike them but rather it's because I disagree with their view.
- There is nothing wrong with lengthy debates (God has been debated for 100s of years!) just as long as both sides are respectful and genuinely disagree.
- If you don't defend your view, then falsehoods will perpetuate, just as it has been happening with polygamy.
- I 'personally' believe that turning every conversation into a debate is unnecessary, like turning a casual convo into a debate but I don't hesitate to challenge viewpoints on important topics like divorce and remarriage, God's existence, etc. But then again, I find it equally problematic to try to have ALL casual conversations even on important matters, including those where your companion is making blatant falsehoods.

 

[FollowingHim2]

You know I've stopped debating online lately and my life has become a whole lot more relaxed and quieter lol. I've found that a lot of people online are hugely un-educated and actually do not want to have a serious debate. Conversations tend to go as follows:

Person: You need to f***** vaccinate your kids!
Me: Ok, can you give me some decent studies that say that vaccinations work and aren't harmful?
Person: You've just been reading too many conspiracy theories. Clearly it works because look at you, you were vaccinated and didn't die of f***** measels. We need to stop the spread of these diseases and I don't want my kids getting them.
Me: But I did get mumps as a child and my sister got rubella, even though we were fully vaccinated. We could have passed those on to other vaccinated or non-vaccinated children. If vaccinations worked, then wouldn't your children be safe from those unvaccinated ones?
Person: You're such a f**** idiot! You don't know what you're talking about! I hope your kids never come anywhere near mine! Your children are going to die of preventable diseases!
Me: Once again, do you have any medical studies that back up your view that vaccination is best?
Person: You're a terrible mother!

So, I've given up. People don't want to think, and when they get challenged they resort to personal attacks. I'm not just talking about vaccination. How about breast feeding or bottle feeding. Demand feeding or routine feeding. Cry it out or co-sleeping. Home birth or hospital birth.
Yes these are all mum topics. I'm a mum. But it's the same when I have biblical discussions frequently too. So many subjects, always the same conversations as above.

 

[FollowingHim]

Debating works when all parties want to learn. It turns into an argument when some parties only want to teach. There is certainly a place for debate. And when it is done politely and humbly it can be very positive. Or it can be the complete opposite, and that is sadly more common, particularly online.

 

[aineo]

PolyPride, I happen to love a good debate, or at least I have in times in my past. I have given much thought to the debating that has happened here lately, and here is where I find the issue: I quit reading the forum regularly because of the constant debating, and I am sure I was not alone. I am not saying the debating was wrong, but it was affecting the usefulness of the forum for others.

I guess the other point is that it often seemed to turn into an argument, where jabs were being thrown. It may not have been intended that way, but from my perspective that got old.

Perhaps a header in a topic such as "Title: (DEBATE)" would denote it as such and forewarn those who aren't interested in reading through the back and forth that comes in a debate to avoid it.

 

[Slumberfreeze]

That's a pretty cool idea. Sounds like it would keep the rugby matches out of the tea party, and vise-versa

 

[PolyPride]

Just to clarify one statement I made towards the end of post #1. I would say there's no perfect line to draw when it comes to when to debate or when not to. In general, of course I try not to mix debate with regular/casual talk or casual laid back moments. I mainly debate online and on important issues that I feel strongly about.

FollowingHim2,
I can relate to that type of discussion that you posted. All debates should be rational - based on reason and evidence. Without those factors being accepted by both parties, the conversation will likely go no where positive towards the truth.

aineo,
I appreciate you explaining your point. Based on some comments from other members, it felt almost as if (not that it's the case, just feels like it) that everyone on this forum had to agree with each other's views without any disagreements. Challenging a viewpoint was like an insult. If a forum is like that it would not be practical unless no one cared to test viewpoints to see if they're true or unless all threads on important issues like divorce and remarriage, same-sex acts between wives in poly, the real Sabbath Day, etc would all be locked by a moderator.

As I tried to explain earlier, debates should be respectful and rational. It should be about the viewpoint and not about the person. If I disagree with someone's view and offer a reason for that, then people should not get upset with that, especially on a topic where there are strong positions on both sides.

Thanks for your good idea to put "debate" in the subject line! I will probably do something along those lines for any topic that I start. The thing is I know some times the conversations can be mixed where an intelligent convo turns into a little friendly debate. Perhaps if it drags out into a lengthy debate then the moderator can suggest to open a new thread putting "debate" or something else similar in the subject line.

Also, for those who don't want their views challenged whatsoever, I would recommend blocking me so that you can not view my posts.

 

[FollowingHim2]

Debating works when all parties want to learn. It turns into an argument when some parties only want to teach.

This is what happens on BF. Someone new comes in only wanting to teach, because they're perfect and know everything, and will not humble them selves to learn also. This has a certain cycle, they aren't around long, and inevitably end up on post approval or being banned.

 

[UntoldGlory]

Sometimes a perfectly reasonable debate accidentally slips into the "argument" realm through no particular malice. Occasionally I think this is to be expected, then we can all step back and take a breath. It's when that becomes a habit that we need to step back and examine our motivations and practices in my opinion.