11 Jan 09
Being an ordinary Joe, and not schooled or expert in the art of debate, I was wondering if someone could define the terms and conditions of debate.
Maybe we can set some perimeters that could possibly facilitate a more productive and fruitful discussion.
I'm thinking of rules and terms of debate specific to this spirituality forum.
Maybe this is too much to ask! Any suggestions or criticisms are welcome. 🙂
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by josephwHow do you think you would fare better in the debates here?
Being an ordinary Joe, and not schooled or expert in the art of debate, I was wondering if someone could define the terms and conditions of debate.
Maybe we can set some perimeters that could possibly facilitate a more productive and fruitful discussion.
I'm thinking of rules and terms of debate specific to this spirituality forum.
Maybe this is too much to ask! Any suggestions or criticisms are welcome. 🙂
11 Jan 09
2 edits
Originally posted by josephwWhy do we need "rules and terms of" debate here, considering that this is an informal, not formal, setting? The basic idea is to engage others in argument. You present reasons that you think support your case; you entertain objections from others; you challenge others on their points and insert your own objections; etc. The most important thing, I think, is that you engage in the practice of providing reasons for and against. Hopefully this is done in a constructive, civil manner without resorting to insults and the like, but...
Being an ordinary Joe, and not schooled or expert in the art of debate, I was wondering if someone could define the terms and conditions of debate.
Maybe we can set some perimeters that could possibly facilitate a more productive and fruitful discussion.
I'm thinking of rules and terms of debate specific to this spirituality forum.
Maybe this is too much to ask! Any suggestions or criticisms are welcome. 🙂
Also, I don't take it to be the case that this forum is just about debate. This is also an outlet of expression. If people want to post poetry, for example, then more power to them.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by LemonJelloYes , but if you are obviously in a debate with someone then it's a good idea to have some parameters. For example , if someone quotes Jesus in support of an argument then it would be expected that another quote of Jesus should be taken seriously as a repost.
Why do we need "rules and terms of" debate here, considering that this is an informal, not formal, setting? The basic idea is to engage others in argument. You present reasons that you think support your case; you entertain objections from others; you challenge others on their points and insert your own objections; etc. The most important thing, I thin ...[text shortened]... n outlet of expression. If people want to post poetry, for example, then more power to them.
If someone uses a certain logic then the other person should also be able to use it without a protest.
What I try to do is think about what logic or reasoning the other person is using and then try and turn that to my advantage. The problem is that it's often "one rule for me and one rule for the other". We all do it but some more than most. Consistency is the only thing we can ask from each other.
11 Jan 09
3 edits
I don't know about general terms of all denates. But the best website I ever participated in had rules for debates something like this:
Two Participants only except for free selected questions from the audience afterwards.
500 words opening statement
500 words reply.
1600 words EACH round one.
1600 words EACH round two.
1600 words EACH round three
500 words closing argument
500 words closing argument
100 words EACH three questions to opponent
300 words EACH three replies.
Selected Questions from the audience chosen by Moderator to
either participant.
One of the advisory rules was to direct your speaking to the audience and not to the opposite participant. You were NOT out to convince your opponent but to pursuade the audience.
Those were the most constructive debates I have ever participated in on the web. They were very strict about counting words. You could not submit more words than were allowed, period. You had to edit your posts for word count before they were accepted.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by jaywillAsk rwingett and DoctorScribbles how many words are contained in a 1600-word text; I dare you.
I don't know about general terms of all denates. But the best website I ever participated in had rules for debates something like this:
Two Participants only except for free selected questions from the audience afterwards.
500 words opening statement
500 words reply.
1600 words EACH round one.
1600 words EACH round two.
1600 words EACH ro ...[text shortened]... audience.
Those were the most constructive debates I have ever participated in on the web.
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by josephwActually, I've been thinking of challenging someone to a new debate. I need to avenge my loss to Dr. Scribbles. Give me a little bit and I will post my challenge along with my proposed rules.
Being an ordinary Joe, and not schooled or expert in the art of debate, I was wondering if someone could define the terms and conditions of debate.
Maybe we can set some perimeters that could possibly facilitate a more productive and fruitful discussion.
I'm thinking of rules and terms of debate specific to this spirituality forum.
Maybe this is too much to ask! Any suggestions or criticisms are welcome. 🙂
11 Jan 09
Originally posted by knightmeisterI am having trouble understanding your post.
Yes , but if you are obviously in a debate with someone then it's a good idea to have some parameters. For example , if someone quotes Jesus in support of an argument then it would be expected that another quote of Jesus should be taken seriously as a repost.
If someone uses a certain logic then the other person should also be able to use it withou ...[text shortened]... all do it but some more than most. Consistency is the only thing we can ask from each other.
if someone quotes Jesus in support of an argument then it would be expected that another quote of Jesus should be taken seriously as a repost.
If poster1 says something like, "Jesus stated 'X' and that supports my case for reasons x,y,z"; then what are you suggesting is 'expected' in the reply of poster2? I would have thought that poster2 is just expected to give reasons why he agrees or disagrees with poster1. What does another quote of Jesus have to do with anything? Maybe I am not understanding your point.
If someone uses a certain logic then the other person should also be able to use it without a protest.
Again, I don't understand what you mean.
12 Jan 09
Originally posted by LemonJelloIt's just about the responsibility of holding yourself accountable to your own reasoning. For example , ToOne always debated with me by invoking how we should heed the words of Jesus and reprimanded me for not doing so. When I pointed out that there were other things that Jesus said that countered him he did not heed them or want to explore them. Frustrating....
I am having trouble understanding your post.
[b]if someone quotes Jesus in support of an argument then it would be expected that another quote of Jesus should be taken seriously as a repost.
If poster1 says something like, "Jesus stated 'X' and that supports my case for reasons x,y,z"; then what are you suggesting is 'expected' in the reply of p ...[text shortened]... also be able to use it without a protest.[/b]
Again, I don't understand what you mean.[/b]
It's all about whether one poster wants to play with a loaded dice or not. We just end up cheating ourselves if we do.
12 Jan 09
Originally posted by knightmeisterOkay, thanks, I think I understand your point now.
It's just about the responsibility of holding yourself accountable to your own reasoning. For example , ToOne always debated with me by invoking how we should heed the words of Jesus and reprimanded me for not doing so. When I pointed out that there were other things that Jesus said that countered him he did not heed them or want to explore them. Frust ...[text shortened]... ne poster wants to play with a loaded dice or not. We just end up cheating ourselves if we do.