Internet debates, what's the point?

Remove all ads!

I'm not entirely sure which forum this would belong to but figured that most debates take place in the alleys anyway so I decided the "target audience" would be better reached here. In any case these are some thoughts about my view on internet debates.

In any case I'm sure most of us who post in the alleys have met the situation where debating seems like hitting your head on a brick wall. This is more of a norm than exception with debates since they by definition include discussion by two people who disagree on a subject. So why bother trying at all?

In my view internet debates are an excellent method of discussing with people of different opinions, people who you'd probably not meet in your everyday life. The goal is to better understand those views and perhaps try to learn something. Sometimes it's really difficult when someone seems perfectly unreasonable to any kinds of arguments, or if the views of that person seem somehow wrong and foreign. The controversy though is important, people who agree with each other all the time have little to contribute to each other and understanding their reasoning poses little challenge. I think it's a bit of a shame that some more controversial figures have disappeared from these boards over the time but there also is a point when personal attacks become intolerable and quite often they leave from their own initiative anyway.

I've talked with numerous people who predominantly seek to win debates. They either outlast their opponents (very often through stone deaf attitude) or gather up articles/evidence that they feel proves their point beyoned all doubt. I don't think an individual side can ever win or lose an debate over the internet. Someone certainly can be more articulate and make a better case for himself than the other but that's hardly winning it. I still think a debate can be lost though, it's lost when the discussion degenerates into personal attacks and strays away from the original subject. A debate can also be won, that's when a better understanding of the other's point of view is achieved or when the participants have learned something from the discussion.

So to summarize I think that with right people who internet debating can be very worthwhile. As long as people keep an open mind and avoid arrogant attitudes it can even yield some satisfaction, even though at most cases we'll just have to agree to disagree in the end.

Feel free to comment the rant or on internet debating in general.

 

In general, arguments aren't worthwhile (internet or otherwise). As Dale Carnegie once wrote: "The best way to win an argument is not to have one at all."

 

There's a big difference between an argument and a debate. I think Morgoroth pinned it down perfectly when he said debates aren't something one should set out to win - where as arguments are. Debates test your belief, bring out questions that you may not have thought of and make you think and learn and allows you to see other peoples views and opinions on the matter.

 

Debates ARE arguments. 'Debate' is merely a more formal term.

 

I suppose that depends on what you're debating

First post in the Alley!

 

Yes and no.

Using oxford english dictionary, I would define a debate and an argument as follows:

Debate: a formal discussion in a public meeting or legislature, in which opposing arguments are presented.

Argument: a heated exchange of diverging or opposite views.

 

TMH's belief that most arguments aren't worthwhile, in my view, tells us more about TMH than argumentation.

No, that's not a personal attack.

 

Actually, I find internet debates quite worthwhile. They give me opportunity to write about things I would otherwise never write about. I find that when I write I reflect about things, much more so than if I just talk and read about them. As a result of that I have learned a few things I think. I have encountered some interesting arguments made by others along the way. Some debates were inspiring, just as some were just atrocious and arduous.

As for the 'disputes', heated ones even, they are just half as useless than they are alleged to be. Sometimes you have to take a stand.

Also, it ensures that I keep using my English. Good in itself.

 

While my attitudes and opinions do not change, occasionally I do gain some insight into the other side of the debate. It does not mean I am prepared to change my beliefs when something central to my beliefs is challenged.

AS Ragusa pointed out, there are times where you have to stand up for something. In such cases, I do try to take such a stand.

 

Because other people's opinions are sometimes REALLY funny?

 

I believe Harbourboy got it. That and all the drama you get to see sometimes

But, talking seriously, I believe internet debates/arguments can yield merit, just like real life ones. But only if you do it correctly, mindless bashing won't do any good whatsoever.

 

Practice. To hone the skills of argumentation and debate. To clarfiy your view to yourself. Taking a stand in the net might not make a difference, but if you never do, you never learn and so nothing changes. To open yourself to the possibility to be swayed and to be changed. To broaden your horizons, to see things from possibly completely different perspective. To understand people who have differing opinions.

Yes, internet debates are worthwile, as much as any debates, up to the point of pointless arguing. The net is making shifting the argumentation a little from resorting to ad hominem. Since basically anyone can say anything, the difference starts to lie more in what has been said instead of who's saying what, although that still does play a big role...

 

Now what was that quote? Oh yes.

 

AMaster:

Baiting posters, eh? I've noticed that baiting is a quaint sport on this forum.

But to be honest, your disagreement isn't with me. I'm merely quoting 'Dale Carnegie', who wrote the book 'How to Win Friends and Influence People'. If you think you know more about this issue than an individual who has lectured on this issue for decades, then feel free too. But don't be surprised if I give an exaggerated eye rolly.

 

I wasn't baiting you.

 

I believe Amaster was commenting more on the irony of someone who is arguably the most argumentative person on this board stating that "arguments aren't worthwhile".

On a side note, most of us (myself included) will agree with Mr. Carnegie about arguments not being worthwhile.....but there's a big different between an argument and a debate. I've read Mr Carnegie's stuff and can vouch for the fact that Mr. Carnegie never said that debate's weren't worth while (unless you are selling something, in which case it's better to stick to innocuous subjects like he weather or baseball than it is to risk pissing your potential customer off by bringing up the relative merits of assisted suicide, the death penalty, or abortion when what you are selling is foot warmers or unemployment insurance).

 

I enjoy internet debates, especially here at SP. When your opponent is arguing in good faith, it can be a means to unearth truth and reach common understanding. Which in turn can educate both parties and serve to logically cast out weak and fallacious notions, even when you ultimately don't agree in the end. Though I don't always agree with everyone here whom I debate, I will almost always learn something and come away from the debate with a better understanding of the subject matter than I had before. In some cases, I've been convinced to completely change my position on something.

That said - when someone isn't arguing in good faith, and are clearly more interested in picking fights and belittling everyone else than it unearthing common truth and engaging in polite discussion, then it is quite pointless.

 

AMaster:

It wasn't?

I hardly ever see the point in internet debates. More often than not, they turn into baiting and belittling of other people. Granted, I hardly ever debate on the internet anyway so my point based on what I've seen rather than what I've experienced.

I find people are frequently set in their ways and obviously almost everyone usually believes they are right, so what's the point in trying to convince them otherwise?

I don't really know where I'm coming from here and I've completely lost direction. Huh.

 

The difference between a debate and an argument is the presence of mutual respect.

 

I have benefitted enormously from debating (arguing) here on SP. I think spending my keystrokes here has given me a chance to exchange ideas about topics that are not easily discussed. In arguing about religion and politics here on SP, I have alienated a group of people whom are virtually meaningless (no offence) in my life, rather than alienated friends. So, though my friends may know that I am an obnoxious atheist, they have not had to put up with me attacking their belief systems in order to validate my own.