Difference between revisions of "You have lost the debate"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(saving work) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
</hide> | </hide> | ||
'''Meaning''': By your failure to acknowledge vital facts and/or reasoning presented within a discussion: | '''Meaning''': By your failure to acknowledge vital facts and/or reasoning presented within a discussion: | ||
| − | * You have demonstrated that your objective in said discussion is not a search for truth but rather to convince others of your predetermined position – a contest of wills. | + | * You have demonstrated that your objective in said discussion is not a search for truth but rather to convince others of your predetermined position (PP) – a contest of wills. |
* You have lost that contest. | * You have lost that contest. | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
* [[Competitive debate]] consists of two (or more, but not usually) parties who each attempt to make the most persuasive argument for predetermined conclusions. | * [[Competitive debate]] consists of two (or more, but not usually) parties who each attempt to make the most persuasive argument for predetermined conclusions. | ||
| − | Unfortunately, a debate cannot remain rational if any of the participants view it competitively. | + | Unfortunately, a debate cannot remain rational if any of the participants view it competitively. If your strategy is to defend your beliefs regardless of evidence rather than setting your beliefs according to what the prevailing evidence shows, then you can never learn, most of your beliefs will be wrong, and you won't be able to defend them rationally. You will therefore lose any rational debate in which you continue with this strategy. |
| − | |||
Revision as of 12:16, 9 May 2016
Meaning: By your failure to acknowledge vital facts and/or reasoning presented within a discussion:
- You have demonstrated that your objective in said discussion is not a search for truth but rather to convince others of your predetermined position (PP) – a contest of wills.
- You have lost that contest.
Explanation
Debate generally comes in either of two forms:
- Rational debate generally consists of two or more parties exchanging information in a mutual search for a better understanding of the truth.
- Competitive debate consists of two (or more, but not usually) parties who each attempt to make the most persuasive argument for predetermined conclusions.
Unfortunately, a debate cannot remain rational if any of the participants view it competitively. If your strategy is to defend your beliefs regardless of evidence rather than setting your beliefs according to what the prevailing evidence shows, then you can never learn, most of your beliefs will be wrong, and you won't be able to defend them rationally. You will therefore lose any rational debate in which you continue with this strategy.