|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:51 pm
Now, in this thread, I will put friendly pieces of advice given by myself and others. Just tell me what you want to put in the first post, and, should I deem it good enough (Don't worry, I probably will), it shall be placed inside this post.
Read the bottom for the rules.
Friendly Advice:
Important Stuffs
1. Just because you find that you cannot debate a certain point made by an opponent, do not immediately concede. Give it a bit of time; think it over for a bit.
2. KNOW when to concede. More generally, unless you argue based on facts accepted by your opponent, you can't force a concession. Indeed, most debates probably discover incompatible world views rather than producing converts. When you run out of mutually accepted "facts" is when you agree to disagree. Now, if you have one mutually accepted fact, you can win.
NOTE: Just because it is illegal, it does not make it bad. The law can be wrong, and is ever changing. EXAMPLE: Do not base an argument against abortion off of the law. You won't win. The law also has many loopholes, where facts do not. (I myself didn't learn this for a month after joining the ED)
3. Just because you can beat all of your friends, that doesn't mean you can beat the ED. The ED is filled with people like your friends, people like you, and people that are just plain better. Don't assume your argument is irrefutable. They almost never are.
4. If you become a regular, you will almost always make an enemy, unless you never offend anyone. Ever. Which is impossible. People are too easily offended. Don't worry about it too much.
5. If you think someone's argument is wrong but you aren't sure how to prove it, see if you can make them prove it. Ask them for proof of any generalizations. Make them qualify definitions and otherwise tighten up their argument. Always double check for fallacies too, a lot of them are quite rampid in the ED. You can win a debate without ever putting forth an opposing view if the other person is sloppy.
6. Sometimes it is best not to try and win a debate because the debate itself can't be won. Your goal should be just not to lose.
Think if it like a game of chess. Your opponent is just trying to win the game, but your goal is just not to lose. That means if you can't win you try and force a tie. You don't win, but you don't lose ether.
7. There are some people who make topics, and when they try to debate, they fence-sit, afraid of saying one thing or the other (therefore actually defining their opinion instead of being vague). While these people are often not that entertaining or fun to debate with, sometimes a regular person may fence-sit on a particular topic because it might reveal they are wrong. If they are fence-sitting on something, try asking questions about that particular topic. Be sure to add that a definite opinion would be basically required in order to state such a view on another similar topic. Do NOT, however, force that person to say their opinion if it's not really related to the topic. That's just dumb.
Example: Let's say someone says they are against animal cruelty (sorry guys, no offence here), but they say nothing about what effects not being able to animal test would have on civilization. By bring up this topic, you can perhaps create a hole in their argument, and I suppose it could turn the tide of 'battle' if you're losing. Still, use this wisely. Otherwise, you just look like an...a**. Although I suppose that doesn't matter if you don't care about what others think of you.
8. Knowledge is knowing the facts but wisdom is knowing how to use them. Logic and reasoning are as useful, if not more useful than, facts. (2nd sentence reworded by Sama)
9. (A) If someone's getting on your nerves, back off the ED for a while, log off of Gaia, do something you enjoy and just don't think about it. It is better to be labeled a "deserter" and then prove them wrong than to risk being banned as a troll.
Another possibility is just leaving. There are some people that refuse to listen to reason, no matter how much proof you show them, and will always insult you. Sometimes it's better to concede than to just end up furious.
10. Don't get drawn in to incivility. To a third party reading the argument, you keeping a cool head while they explode makes you look that much more right. Granted being a jerk on the forums can be fun sometimes- But that's just no reason to do it. We all slip up at times- but you look far more convincing if you stay polite in your criticism. Not only that, but you will also have a much more understandable argument. Avoiding caps lock really helps, no matter your anger.
11. (Though this is basic, I felt this was important enough to be put into this category) Some tips from me are to feel confident about your topic. If you don't, then your argument will easily collapse with just a simple mistake. The destruction of your argument will make your esteem lower, because of your insecurity. You will also start to feel insecure about your other opinions. Avoid this. Also, don't try to hint that other opinions are just stupid and you think that the person has nothing to back themselves up. That includes religion and trying to make someone convert. Don't have short one-liners (Unless you really get your point across) and don't fill up like half of the page.
The Very Basics
1. Learn to tell the difference between a troll/jackass and somebody making a simple mistake. Read carefully before hastily flaming.
2. Do not be a sore loser or winner. If you lose, read over the debate. Realize what you did wrong, and try not to make those mistakes next time. Chances are, you will have plenty of other opportunities to debate that topic. If you do win, don't rub it in anybody's face.
3. Be sure that your arguments are clear and understandable to everybody. If you do not do this, you may get the wrong idea across, or people will simply skip over your post. (This happens a lot, these small misunderstandings. Try to be understanding, and do not get angry just because someone misunderstood you.)
4. More obviously, do not use chat-speak. Spell check if you can. If you want to look even more experienced, try not to use any contractions.
5. Do not automatically say a thread belongs in GD/Chatterbox just because the main post is not as deep as you would have liked, or you don't like the conversation. There are a lot of things that, while not being so deep and philosophical that it'd make it into a philo class, could still make for a nice debate and discussion. Many people who type in chat speak have started 15+ page discussions.
6. Don't hold a vendetta against the ED just because you're post didn't make it big. Look it over. See what you did wrong. Was the topic interesting at all?
7. Depending on the topic(s) you are debating whether it's about science, life issues or especially morality, double-check your arguments. My point is to truly perceive arguments or research; do not 'fire' wide pages of info. from Wikipedia towards the opposition. Just because Wikipedia has an over-average legitimacy does it means it is eligible for that particular discussion.
8. Don't give up until disproved 80-100%: This will not only lengthen the debate (which may be considered bad or good) but it can also make the argument of another person, and the rationale behind it, become clearer to you, making you see your mistakes more thoroughly.
9. No subjective premises should be used: Please don't you use statements like "I think it's ugly" etc. to support your claims. No one cares what you think. They care about what you know.
10. Do not throw back a persons argument: Being flexible is ED material. You can make counter-arguments, but you cannot refuse or throw back a persons material just because it is offending you because of it's style, or because you do not agree. Please construct counter-arguments.
11. Do NOT, I repeat, DO NOT only attack certain tid-bits of a persons whole argument: Because you attack one reason doesn't make the conclusion irrelevant, invalid, or incorrect, as there are other premises which might still strongly support their opinion. Of course, you could skip unnecessary bits of information, as they're irrelevant to the actual point of the post, and inadequate to the post itself. The only time you can actually attack a portion of what he said, is if that's the only portion you disagree with, or if you only wish to correct them should they truly be wrong. If you disagree with the conclusion, you must attack everything he/she used to support it in order to actually win.
12. Make your post as short as you can, relative to the rationale, the amount of explanation/rationale needed, etc.
Rules
1. To make it easier on me, number your additions to this thread.
2. Tell me whether or not I am allowed to edit what you have said (Within reason, of course) because you may have missed something important, or put in too much information. This thread is big enough without all that. Though, please, write out everything you think is important, as I may be able to shorten it. If you don't mention it, I will edit it.
3. If you see a discrepancy, or a spelling error, TELL ME.
4. Don't get mad at me if I don't put your advice in right away. Give me time. I'm a busy person. I'd say... 5-7 days before you start whining.
5. If you find a problem with a piece of advice, please PM me as to avoid unnecessary posts. The chance of me missing a PM is much less likely than missing a post.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 4:01 pm
Learn to tell the difference between a troll/jackass and somebody making a simple mistake. Read carefully before hastily flaming.
Do not be a sore loser or winner. If you lose, read over the debate. Realize what you did wrong, and try not to make those mistakes next time. Chances are, you will have plenty of other opportunities to debate that topic. If you do win, don't rub it in anybody's face.
Be sure that your arguments are clear and understandable to everybody. If you do not do this, you may get the wrong idea across, or people will simply skip over your post.
More obviously, do not use chat-speak. Spell check if you can. If you want to look even more experienced, try not to use any contractions. Slang is also bad.
That's all I can really contribute. =/
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 5:10 pm
Don't get drawn in to incivility. To a third party reading the argument, you keeping a cool head while they explode makes you look that much more right. Granted being a jerk on the forums can be fun sometimes- I won't say rude remarks when your opponent is making painfully obvious mistakes doesn't feel good, but just because it does is no reason to do it. We all slip up and do it at times- but you look far more convincing if you stay polite in your criticism.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Okay, so I haven't been in the E.D. much. But I don't think that arguements/debates are about winning/losing, just contribute your own opinion. Stick around if you want to stimulate your mind and see other people's opinions, but you don't have to, though you can learn something.
Don't randomly shoot down other people's arguements if you haven't grasped the arguement's concepts. Don't do it just to troll/get flambéd, try to be somewhat intelligent. Do use proper grammar/spelling, so that people actually read what you write. Don't try to impose your opinions on other people; they have a right to their own beliefs. Don't think that your opinions are the only ones that matter. You're no better than the next person, but no worse. There may not be a right or wrong. Since we have not yet obtained absolute knowledge, then there is no right or wrong - it's in the eye of the beholder. Be prepared to back your opinion with facts/info. You debate to learn, to broaden your mind, to enjoy yourself. Not to put down others or bully others. This isn't preschool, but it's not the business world either.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:42 am
Speak in third person, so as to disconnect any personal-feel from what you're discussing and prevent others from getting personally-defensive. Avoid using the words "I", "you" or "your". These words connect the topic of discussion with the people discussing it, and some people can't help but become immediately defensive without realising it if they feel like they're being attacked personally. Negative example: Quote: I don't like your beliefs in unicorns because.... Positive example: Quote: Unicorns aren't real because....
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:37 pm
1. Do NOT feel insecure on your opinion: Being insecure will only cause your argument to quickly collapse, because of the resulting clumsiness in your post: bad explanation, bad rhetoric, bad logic etc. Because of the pressure thats being put down on your lack of confidence you have towards your arguments. Plus, the destruction of your argument will make your esteem become lower, because of your insecurity. You will also start to feel insecure about your other opinions. Avoid this.
2. First time for everything: Don't worry about losing a debate/argument, and don't overreact to winning. This is a BIG problem for me, and it's because usually, I'm adamant to my opinion, and am very rigid.
3. Don't give up until disproved 80-100%: This will not only lengthen the debate (which may be considered bad or good) but it can also make the argument of another person, and the rationale behind it, become clearer to you, making you see your mistakes more thoroughly.
4. Don't act like an a*****e (relative to your standard and circumstance): I sometimes have a problem with this....
5. No subjective premises should be used: Please don't you use statements like "I think it's ugly" etc. to support your claims
6. Do not throw back a persons argument: Being flexible is ED material. You can make counter-arguments, but you cannot refuse or throw back a persons material just because it is offending you because of it's style, or because you do not agree. Please construct counter-arguments.
7. Do NOT feel discouraged or intimidated.
8. Do NOT, I repeat, DO NOT only attack certain tid-bits of a persons whole argument: Because you attack one reason doesn't make the conclusion irrelevant, invalid, or incorrect, as there are other premises which might still strongly support their opinion. Of course, you could skip unnecessary bits of information, as they're irrelevant to the actual point of the post, and inadequate to the post itself. The only time you can actually attack a portion of what he said, is if that's the only portion you disagree with. If you disagree with the conclusion, you must attack everything he/she used to support it. I've seen this been done countless of times, please don't do it.
9. Do not leave the thread just because you have been beaten or have beaten someone. The argument of the person you beat might have been right for the wrong reasons, and their might be someone else with a better more valid substantial info and rationale to support the same claim of the person you beat. Also, it's interesting to watch where the debate ends. You could also find more post to "test". The thread as a whole is rich, not only is your particular discussion with another person.
10. Don't opinion dump, explain why.
11. Make your post as short as you can, relative to the rationale, the amount of explanation/rationale needed, etc.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:55 pm
Some tips from me are to feel confident about your topic. If you don't, then your argument will easily collapse with a simple mistake. Also, don't try to hint that other opinions are just stupid and you think that the person has nothing to back themselves up. That includes religion and trying to make someone convert. Don't have short one liners (Unless you really get your point across) and don't fill up like half of the page.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:50 pm
Mh'hm, my advice is not long and deep, it's simple, plain and straightforward. Depending on the topic(s) you are debating whether it's about science, life issues or especially morality, double-check your arguments. My point is to truly perceive arguments or research; do not 'fire' wide pages of info. from Wikipedia towards the opposition. Just because Wikipedia has an over-average legitimacy does it means it is eligible for that particular discussion..
Example: Two Gaians continuously debate over which gender is the fittest, physically and mentally, a discussion spanning over fifty pages. The guy generalizes using post-traumatic stress (combat-oriented stress) that male soldiers can withstand more torture than the female soldier. Although the guy did not read what Wikipedia states further about that specific stress or if it is even suitable for the given topic..
Concluding, arguments should be the fundamental roots.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:01 am
Here's some advice from me, as I did not see it anywhere above.
Do not automatically say a thread belongs in GD/Chatterbox just because the main post is not as deep as you would have liked, or you don't like the conversation. There are a lot of things that, while not being so deep and philosophical that it'd make it into a philo class, could still make for a nice debate and discussion.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:11 am
To point #2: More generally, unless you argue based on facts accepted by your opponent, you can't force a concession. Indeed, most debates probably discover incompatible world views (postulate sets) rather than producing converts. When you run out of mutually accepted "facts" is when you agree to disagree.
BTW, you'll notice a disappointing number of opponents suggesting that you agree to disagree when they can no longer support their arguments with their own assertions. You may agree to stop arguing (because you would be repeating yourself), but you never need accept an irrational connection from acceptable facts to unsupportable conclusion.
Even if an irrational opponent won't reconcile axioms with fixed ideas, the audience should always be informed that a fact or two must be abandoned if one wishes to retain some cherished but incompatible conclusion.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:24 am
Uncle Jeff To point #2: More generally, unless you argue based on facts accepted by your opponent, you can't force a concession. Indeed, most debates probably discover incompatible world views (postulate sets) rather than producing converts. When you run out of mutually accepted "facts" is when you agree to disagree. BTW, you'll notice a disappointing number of opponents suggesting that you agree to disagree when they can no longer support their arguments with their own assertions. You may agree to stop arguing (because you would be repeating yourself), but you never need accept an irrational connection from acceptable facts to unsupportable conclusion. Even if an irrational opponent won't reconcile axioms with fixed ideas, the audience should always be informed that a fact or two must be abandoned if one wishes to retain some cherished but incompatible conclusion. Could you please clarify your third paragraph?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 10:34 pm
Quote: 6. Don't hold a vendetta against the ED just because you're post didn't make it big.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:57 pm
My advice: Debates are a learning experience, not just a teaching experience. Try to get something out of it, not just state your views.
SO obvious, but yet SO important.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:23 pm
NOTE: There are two things I wish to add to the main post, but I cannot due to a glitch in which it makes a second post, and leaves the first one unaltered.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|