Difference between revisions of "Issuepedia:Arguing"

From Issuepedia
m (+catg: help)
(/trust)
 
(28 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[category:help]]Unlike other reference projects, Issuepedia welcomes personal opinion.
+
[[category:help]]
 +
==About==
 +
Unlike other reference projects, Issuepedia welcomes statements of personal [[opinion]].
  
However, opinions without good arguments behind them will probably be shredded or at least questioned. Attempts to undermine other debaters by use of [[logical fallacies]] and other [[rhetorical deception]]s will be called out.
+
However:
 +
* Any [[opinion]] is an [[assertion]] of [[fact]].
 +
* Any assertion may be challenged.
 +
* A challenged assertion that is not defended with a [[rational]] argument based on acceptable [[evidence]] need not be taken seriously.
  
==Guidelines==
+
Also, attempts to undermine other debaters by use of [[logical fallacies]] and other [[rhetorical deception]]s will be called out.
* '''Be clear''' about what you're trying to claim; vague implications reek of attempted manipulation, however well-intended it may be.
 
* If a fact is in contention, you will need a good argument to support your take on it.
 
  
When arguing against something someone else has said:
+
==Details==
* DON'T simply claim that the source is unreliable.
+
* [[/guidelines]]: more specifics on how to keep a debate productive
* DON'T [[ad hominem|attack the other debater's credibility]] (expertise, credentials, personal habits).
+
* [[/trust]]: heuristics for managing bad faith
* DO '''address the ''substance''''' of the argument you are disputing.
+
 
* DO find other sources which have more accurate information.
+
==Basics==
* DO offer arguments for why the what they said cannot be true.
+
:1. '''[[/assertion]]s''': An assertion that has not been [[/challenge|challenge]]d may be assumed to be true.
* DO offer corrected information (not "you're wrong" but "the correct information is...", preferably with one or more sources).
+
:2. '''[[/challenge]]s''': When an assertion is challenged,
* DO offer arguments to support what you think is correct.
+
::2a. [[/challenge/undefended|if it remains undefended]], it must be assumed to be false.
 +
::2b. [[/challenge/responsibility|responsibility]] for resolving a challenge rests with the person who made the assertion.
 +
:3. '''[[/clarity]] of arguments''': Responsibility for making an argument clear lies ''on the arguer'', not the respondent.
 +
 
 +
For more specifics, see:
 +
* [[/guidelines]]: valid and invalid argumentation techniques

Latest revision as of 11:25, 29 August 2017

About

Unlike other reference projects, Issuepedia welcomes statements of personal opinion.

However:

  • Any opinion is an assertion of fact.
  • Any assertion may be challenged.
  • A challenged assertion that is not defended with a rational argument based on acceptable evidence need not be taken seriously.

Also, attempts to undermine other debaters by use of logical fallacies and other rhetorical deceptions will be called out.

Details

  • /guidelines: more specifics on how to keep a debate productive
  • /trust: heuristics for managing bad faith

Basics

1. /assertions: An assertion that has not been challenged may be assumed to be true.
2. /challenges: When an assertion is challenged,
2a. if it remains undefended, it must be assumed to be false.
2b. responsibility for resolving a challenge rests with the person who made the assertion.
3. /clarity of arguments: Responsibility for making an argument clear lies on the arguer, not the respondent.

For more specifics, see:

  • /guidelines: valid and invalid argumentation techniques