Do you debate to the bitter end?

[BeBMan]

We all know sometimes long debates tend to end in insults or at least with more tensions between the "combattants". What´s your tactic in such cases - do you try to "win" a debate at all costs when you´re convinced of your arguments? Or only in specific circumstances? If so, what are these - topics, other posters you try to "defeat"?

I hardly participate much in big debates here at Poly. Some posts here and there, but most of the time I read (say lurker if you want ). However, sometimes I debate through several pages of a thread in German forums (where I of course feel more secure in the language, esp. when it comes to specific terms needed for the discussion).

I always think it is a strange period of the discussion when both sides are getting more and more provoked. Often insults at eachother are very close then. I personally try to avoid insults most of the time (although I enjoy a mild from of trolling sometimes ), not because I´m such a nice guy, but because I think they usually mark the end of any serious debate. On the other hand I see no reason "to give up" when I think I have the better arguments. However, sometimes even then I get a bad feeling of myself when I argue another person to the death (esp. when I have the impression this person lacks the knowledge to keep up)

What type of debater are you - do rather back up, even if you think you´re right, because you see no sense in continuing a debate full of insults? Or do you try to "win"? Or something in between?

[VetLegion]

I am mostly a lurker here also

Because of time&interest constraints, but I like to read.


About "going to the end", I never do.

If a debate is serious, both parties have to approach it in good faith, which is rarely the case. Actually someone said your first sentence should be "what can I do to prove you wrong?" and if the answer is "nothing" then stop debating


About insults and stuff, well ofcourse one has to distinguish between forum culture, which is different on every forum and on AOT includes a fair amount of teasing and trolling, and real insults meant to hmmm, well, insult

When the second happenes, what I do on usenet is I filter. On apolyton I do not filter since I tolerate much more 'noise' in the signal here, to be technical


Oh, and I might say, I am rarely interesting in arguing about USA. We need more other stuff here

[VetLegion]

Btw., I sometimes considered debating for the sake of debating so the plan was take one random side in a random debate and see if I can pull it out.

Play Advocatus Diaboli. Maybe someday when I have time. Would be a great practice I guess, but the downside is I don't want to be associated with some dumb idea I don't care about

[orange]

Until that point or until I am proven wrong, which I never am

[Lincoln]

I very seldom argue to the bitter end unless I perceive that someone really wants to know the truth or at least learn something new. Usually it seems that people just want to have a battle of wits. That can be fun but it gets tiring. Eithered, and others (I can't recall now) would fill up 300 posts arguing over some trivial point. I never knew him to concede anything ever. I would hate to be married to someone as stubborn as that.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by VetLegion
Btw., I sometimes considered debating for the sake of debating so the plan was take one random side in a random debate and see if I can pull it out.

Yeah, sometimes I act similar, esp. when there´s a debate where a bunch of people with the same opinion go after only one or two opponents. Then I sometimes even take positions I wouldn´t take normally because I think it is better for the debate than all agreeing with eachother. It is also a good method to "probe" the knowledge of the other posters.

However, at some point I make sure they get my real POV to avoid confusion

[Dauphin]

I never try to win an argument I just state what I think and why I think it, whilst questioning the proposed alternatives. I normally leave when it becomes repetitive or derails into insults.

[Agathon]

I get bored. After all when someone posts the same objection you've already dealt with over and over again, it gets really sour.

*gloom*

[JCG]

My half-lurker status prevents me from doing so. And anyways, I usually prefer to give up when I realize I'm facing stone walls.

[yavoon]

I like how everyone in this thread is not only correct, but also patient and willing to teach the heathans of their ways.

its so great to have such a devoted group of right ppl around.

[General Ludd]

I'll stop posting once it has degenerated enough.

[Spiffor]

I generally post my point, and am done until there is something new to discuss in the thread. I have no need to defend my point at all costs, because it is self-evident I am right
More seriously, I can acknowledge my mistakes. I accept the fact that I am not always right, despite my delusions

[Nubclear]

Of course I never do. Why would I waste my time on such an issue?

[Elok]

Originally posted by yavoon
I like how everyone in this thread is not only correct, but also patient and willing to teach the heathans of their ways.

its so great to have such a devoted group of right ppl around.

Lo, the pot speaketh to the kettle.

As for myself, I debate to the bitter end of my attention span, and no further. When the conversation turns into a flamewar or starts going in circles, or if I just feel like doing something else, I do it. Seeing as my opinion on these pages will not be implemented, in all likelihood, by anyone in a position of power, I just stop and go. Makes things more pleasant that way.

[DinoDoc]

It depends on how much I can be arsed to care.