A good debate question - Page 2

Originally posted by: -Aarya-

Any issue worth debating is worth avoiding altogether 😆

Bump Bump Bump 😉

     Hahaha ..exactly ...😆 ..I shoulda met ya a bit earlier when my parents were badgering me over my decision to avoid education ...😛
 
   Vintu ...😛

  

Edited by -Aarya- - 11 years ago

A good debate question should have an answer in either yes or no. The debaters must be able to pick sides and justify what caused them to reach that conclusion. I often find myself thinking I am far from a debater because I scarcely ever see things in black and white. And anyone who sees everything in the grey light of things can never truly and fully defend their chosen side and oppose the other. 

Originally posted by: TheTruth

Of course you can ask any kind of question without knowing anything about it like how a lot of people do around here. For example, I can start a thread asking "What color should the interior walls of death star be?". So, now, every single one who believes death star would be a reality, jump in the thread but how about those who know it is a fiction? If one of those who thinks it is a fiction posts in my thread, s/he will still be replied to? So, does that mean the thread title was misleading?

Everything is debatable as long as one carries a perception of the "thing"!  If one believe there is some truth, that can be demonstrated then debating about it doesn't prove it!
Edited by -Aarya- - 11 years ago

Originally posted by: TheTruth

I am sorry, but that is not how debates work. I gave you an example already. Another one - If I want to debate about which is the best place to live in the world and if I created a thread titled "Why Timbuktu is too much better than any other place in the world?",  what is there to debate? How can you say that Maui is better than Timbuktu because... ? I mean, of course you can but that would be irrelevant to the question I asked.

And maybe my underline question wasn't clear, let ask it differently, can you prove that Timbuktu is the better than any other place in the world? Have you seen all of the world? Though I do understand your point but seems like we are both saying the same thing two different perceptive!

A debate about debating 😆

Fortunately not all members here would go into all that analysing  of the title. Once a topic gets posted you never know where you land up---  it could be anywhere from Kanyakumari to Timbuctoo 🤓

Originally posted by: epiphany.

A good debate question should have an answer in either yes or no. The debaters must be able to pick sides and justify what caused them to reach that conclusion. I often find myself thinking I am far from a debater because I scarcely ever see things in black and white. And anyone who sees everything in the grey light of things can never truly and fully defend their chosen side and oppose the other. 

Actually I think grey shades help have truly complex debates. The more you delve into any subject, the more aware you become of its complexities. Forcing people to boil it down to yes or no can be problematic as well. Really good debates stop having one or two sides, and allow people to insert new dimensions and perspectives into the conversation without expecting everyone to pick one side and oppose the other.

It's true that topics have "sides," but it doesn't always have to be the case. If you don't see things in black and white, then that's a good thing!

Originally posted by: --arti--

Actually I think grey shades help have truly complex debates. The more you delve into any subject, the more aware you become of its complexities. Forcing people to boil it down to yes or no can be problematic as well. Really good debates stop having one or two sides, and allow people to insert new dimensions and perspectives into the conversation without expecting everyone to pick one side and oppose the other.

It's true that topics have "sides," but it doesn't always have to be the case. If you don't see things in black and white, then that's a good thing!

Originally posted by: epiphany.

I don't think anyone sees things in black and white, they'd have to have a very limited understanding to analyse things like that. But to simplify ideas and especially in a debate, people choose sides and a debater has to make sure their side wins. But you say we delve into the matter and grey shades emerge, that's true. But do you think an answer can be reached to after this? 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're questioning whether we can arrive at a conclusion after discussing grey areas. I see what you mean, but I don't think a conclusion is the goal of a debate. Sometimes consensus can result from a debate, and that's different from a conclusion. Individual arguments can have conclusions, but a debate shouldn't have a neat conclusion. Sometimes through a debate, we can pick up some arguments that are superior to others in terms of merit and clarity. Again, not a conclusion though.

Most topics worth discussing are not topics that lend themselves to easy conclusions, especially where subjective experiences are concerned. So the best one can hope for is a rigourous discussion, whereby many people hold themselves to certain analytical standards and try to present a well-formed argument to make their case. In addition to exchange of ideas, this (ideally) facilitates further exploration of a topic in a way that is interesting/productive/worthwhile to those engaged in discussion.

That's not really what happens here, of course, and maybe it shouldn't. I wouldn't mind. But if we are talking about what we like about debating, then that's how I see it.

I agree with Arti, though every debater likes to think that they can finish the debate on the key point, and we are no different from each other.  To me debating as always been a game, it teaches valuable skills, and hopefully remains interesting. The ultimate aim of debating is to win, just like any game. But off course anybody who debates for any length of time is not going to keep winning cause sooner or later, adjudicators will win the debate against you. This may be hard to accept for us but I have always learned the most vital lessons from the debates lost then the debates which were won. To me every debate is an opportunity to learn something...