Difference between revisions of "Structured debate"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Links: lwwiki) |
m (→Reference: um, I meant...) |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
===Reference=== | ===Reference=== | ||
* {{wikipedia|Argument map}} (argument map) | * {{wikipedia|Argument map}} (argument map) | ||
| − | * | + | * {{lwwiki|Debate tools}} (debate tools) |
| + | |||
===News=== | ===News=== | ||
{{links/news}} | {{links/news}} | ||
Revision as of 16:01, 27 December 2012
About
A structured debate is a dispute resolution technique which breaks down the elements of a disagreement into the smallest arguable chunks ("points"), clearly indicating the dependencies between supporting points and the larger points they support or attack.
This helps to prevent a number of common problems with discussions of complex issues:
- accidentally (or deliberately) taking opposing points out of context, and answering them as if the context didn't exist
- the feeling of getting "lost" in the argument due to not knowing what has been settled and what remains to be discussed
- significant points falling by the wayside and remaining unanswered
- conflating multiple points into a single point, which leads easily to making logical fallacies
See project:Structured Debate for extensive design discussion.
Implementations
- Argumentrix is attempting to stage what appears to be loosely-structured debates using MediaWiki as a platform
- Issuepedia is working on a set of rules for structured debate, eventually to be turned into an internet application with a web interface
- category:debates has a list of structured debates using Issuepedia's proposed rules and debaticons
Links
Reference
- Wikipedia (argument map)
- LessWrong Wiki (debate tools)