Why We Suck at Debate (And How to Do It Better)

[JimmySpeaks]

2 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

I win!

At losing. 

[JimmySpeaks]

RV can’t handle other people being successful. 
TPT can’t handle being told he’s woke.  
Slip N Tweet is so mad he’s going after my deceased mom. 
 

such anger over stuff you can’t control. 

Edited 20 hours ago by JimmySpeaks

[Bigbrog]

Just now, JimmySpeaks said:

I have him so angry right now he doesn’t know which end is up.  

He/She/They is pretty predictable...comes on here TRYING to be smart and civil, but will eventually blow up with insults and name calling...funny part is he/she/they even tried to condemn one side for how they debate and he/she/they turn around and do the exact thing he/she/they was claiming the right does...just can't make this stuff up.

[JimmySpeaks]

5 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

He/She/They is pretty predictable...comes on here TRYING to be smart and civil, but will eventually blow up with insults and name calling...funny part is he/she/they even tried to condemn one side for how they debate and he/she/they turn around and do the exact thing he/she/they was claiming the right does...just can't make this stuff up.

Yep you’re spot on and everyone  of them does it. UB says he never uses stereotypes and then his next two posts are stereotypes.  This clown and RV row the hypocrisy boat more than anyone.  Best part is it’s  becoming easier and easier to make them snap.  

Edited 20 hours ago by JimmySpeaks

[ThreePointTakedown]

17 hours ago, jross said:

Are you talking about CK or all conservatives?  

CK was very intelligent.  He leveraged data all the time; often correct and often wrong.  I'll grant you that he is not known for admitting his mistakes and sources after the fact.

The claim about context is important because its relevancy to honest arguments.

The claim about clinging to veracity of claims and not admitting their error is a human condition rather than conservative condition.  There are so many instances of people being proven wrong with data and nothing comes beyond insults, strawmen, and silence

Are you talking about CK or all conservatives?   Yes. Or at least all the conservatives I have seen/heard in the last 15 years. So every member of congress. Pundits, plenty of rep governors and 2 rep PsOTUS. Let’s not forget the golden goose Joe Rogan who couldn't find an argument based in fact with both hands and a flashlight. 

CK was very intelligent.  He leveraged data all the time; often correct and often wrong.  I'll grant you that he is not known for admitting his mistakes and sources after the fact. 'Very' is subjective. Manipulative? Yes. Leveraged or cherry picked? Often right and often wrong, you ain't lyin. Didn't admit it, guess where that trait was acquired? Which federal employee brags about never apologizing or ever admits fault even though they are at the tippy top? If you're guess was 47, you would be right.  

The claim about context is important because its relevancy to honest arguments. You cast such a wide net here. I agree context is important, but I think you fail to understand my point. That bringing up 'context' is the last gasp of a failed argument. Usually done when context has been entirely exhausted and to further muddy the water so as to allow their failed argument to disappear into minutia. 

Its funny to watch conservatives argue. Much like a toddler trying to lie about something, you can see them visibly relax when the claim they just made is being called out. Their opponent is revving up to drop the hammer on the 'trust me bro' point that was just vomited. Interrupting part way through their tongue lashing to oppose a trivial point, the tension of the conservative is released when the opponent abandons the original train of thought to go down the rabbit hole of the trivial point. Never to return to the obvious bad or unfounded original argument. 

The claim about clinging to veracity of claims and not admitting their error is a human condition rather than conservative condition.  There are so many instances of people being proven wrong with data and nothing comes beyond insults, strawmen, and silence. Don't you dare 'both sides' this. That's very disingenuous. Which side is more open to not knowing the answer? The left. Which side is more in favor of funding research, areas of all types, in the hopes of finding the answer to things? The left. Which side uses ALL THE DATA, not just convenient little bits, to prove points and make change? The left. The conservative side is not supported by facts in any area. If there is one, I would love to see it. But considering the conversations that I've been privy to on this board for the last few years. I have yet to see one. At least not one that doesn't devolve into name calling, gas lighting, or outright lying. It's kind of pathetic that you all haven't realized it yet. But some do. More and more people raised conservative and/or religious grow to realize their parents did the best they could but were quite wrong at just about every turn. Leave the house and learn the real truth about the world. Show me a consistent opposition to that point and I'll show you a system built to make young people fail and crawl back home in the hopes of propagating the same scared conservative system. 

[JimmySpeaks]

This conservative system has been in existence for two and a half centuries.  It formed the greatest country this planet has ever known. Millions of people went in here and are willing to risk their lives to do it.  The wokesters hate and vitriol is real but not real enough for them to leave.  All talk and no,action. 

[Gene Mills Fan]

37 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Are you talking about CK or all conservatives?   Yes. Or at least all the conservatives I have seen/heard in the last 15 years. So every member of congress. Pundits, plenty of rep governors and 2 rep PsOTUS. Let’s not forget the golden goose Joe Rogan who couldn't find an argument based in fact with both hands and a flashlight. 

CK was very intelligent.  He leveraged data all the time; often correct and often wrong.  I'll grant you that he is not known for admitting his mistakes and sources after the fact. 'Very' is subjective. Manipulative? Yes. Leveraged or cherry picked? Often right and often wrong, you ain't lyin. Didn't admit it, guess where that trait was acquired? Which federal employee brags about never apologizing or ever admits fault even though they are at the tippy top? If you're guess was 47, you would be right.  

The claim about context is important because its relevancy to honest arguments. You cast such a wide net here. I agree context is important, but I think you fail to understand my point. That bringing up 'context' is the last gasp of a failed argument. Usually done when context has been entirely exhausted and to further muddy the water so as to allow their failed argument to disappear into minutia. 

Its funny to watch conservatives argue. Much like a toddler trying to lie about something, you can see them visibly relax when the claim they just made is being called out. Their opponent is revving up to drop the hammer on the 'trust me bro' point that was just vomited. Interrupting part way through their tongue lashing to oppose a trivial point, the tension of the conservative is released when the opponent abandons the original train of thought to go down the rabbit hole of the trivial point. Never to return to the obvious bad or unfounded original argument. 

The claim about clinging to veracity of claims and not admitting their error is a human condition rather than conservative condition.  There are so many instances of people being proven wrong with data and nothing comes beyond insults, strawmen, and silence. Don't you dare 'both sides' this. That's very disingenuous. Which side is more open to not knowing the answer? The left. Which side is more in favor of funding research, areas of all types, in the hopes of finding the answer to things? The left. Which side uses ALL THE DATA, not just convenient little bits, to prove points and make change? The left. The conservative side is not supported by facts in any area. If there is one, I would love to see it. But considering the conversations that I've been privy to on this board for the last few years. I have yet to see one. At least not one that doesn't devolve into name calling, gas lighting, or outright lying. It's kind of pathetic that you all haven't realized it yet. But some do. More and more people raised conservative and/or religious grow to realize their parents did the best they could but were quite wrong at just about every turn. Leave the house and learn the real truth about the world. Show me a consistent opposition to that point and I'll show you a system built to make young people fail and crawl back home in the hopes of propagating the same scared conservative system. 

1, Conservatives turn to the middle not extremes. Conservatives back behavior that has been corroborated as successful, and beneficial to the majority.

2, Not everyone is correct 100% I'll take some mistakes as long as it just debate. If you are mostly correct, is the barometer, in live conversation without notations

3. context is always important and to suggest it is a guilt process or deflecting is ridiculous. Examine what is said and meant not partial words picked out of an argument.

4. I think a mostly conservative approach to goernment has been directing success for thousands of years.

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

1, Conservatives turn to the middle not extremes. Conservatives back behavior that has been corroborated as successful, and beneficial to the majority.

2, Not everyone is correct 100% I'll take some mistakes as long as it just debate. If you are mostly correct, is the barometer, in live conversation without notations

3. context is always important and to suggest it is a guilt process or deflecting is ridiculous. Examine what is said and meant not partial words picked out of an argument.

4. I think a mostly conservative approach to goernment has been directing success for thousands of years.

1, Conservatives turn to the middle not extremes. Conservatives back behavior that has been corroborated as successful, and beneficial to the majority. Hard disagree there. Please offer a few examples so we have an idea of what it is you are talking about? 

2, Not everyone is correct 100% I'll take some mistakes as long as it just debate. If you are mostly correct, is the barometer, in live conversation without notations In live conversation, sure. With friends or acquaintances, I guess. If you don't have notes or enough information to cogently discuss a topic both for and against, you shouldn't pretend that you can. That is the definition of Dunning Kruger. Its doesn't or shouldn't diminish your sense of self worth that you can't honestly and accurately discuss a topic of relative importance. Understand and admit to yourself what you don't know and make a conscience decision to get better or learn more. But if you're on a web thread the whole 'no notes' thing is ponderous. We have ALL THE NOTES OF EVERYTHING EVER. Just figure out the best source, which the right tends to either not do, do badly, or pretend a source is reputable when its not. Hardly any policy or position the right holds is bore out by facts. Prove me wrong? 

3. context is always important and to suggest it is a guilt process or deflecting is ridiculous. Examine what is said and meant not partial words picked out of an argument. Never said it wasn't important. What I said was that even after context is fully established and accepted and cannot be further dissected, the claim of 'its out of context' is a 'pull in case fire' card that many pundits on the right call on when they are trapped. Knowing full well that yelling at the top of their lungs is distraction enough to get the spot light off of them and not have to admit defeat or that their point has been thoroughly debunked.  

4. I think a mostly conservative approach to goernment has been directing success for thousands of years. I don't disagree with you although I would push back on your use of the word 'success'. That we haven't destroyed ourselves yet is not a great metric for 'success' in my opinion. The pattern of oligarchs gain and wield soft power and begin to steer the ship of government towards what best suites them and their needs, goes back thousands of years, yes. Eventually their arrogance/hubris gets the best of them and they are overthrown, invaded, or beheaded. Rinse repeat. If you're happy with that pattern, bully for you. I'm not to jazzed about the idea, myself. Tell me if you see any similarities in the scenario I put forth above and our current situation? I'll give you a hint, if you say 'no' you're just not trying that hard. 

[jross]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Are you talking about CK or all conservatives?   Yes. Or at least all the conservatives I have seen/heard in the last 15 years. So every member of congress. Pundits, plenty of rep governors and 2 rep PsOTUS. Let’s not forget the golden goose Joe Rogan who couldn't find an argument based in fact with both hands and a flashlight. 

CK was very intelligent.  He leveraged data all the time; often correct and often wrong.  I'll grant you that he is not known for admitting his mistakes and sources after the fact. 'Very' is subjective. Manipulative? Yes. Leveraged or cherry picked? Often right and often wrong, you ain't lyin. Didn't admit it, guess where that trait was acquired? Which federal employee brags about never apologizing or ever admits fault even though they are at the tippy top? If you're guess was 47, you would be right.  

The claim about context is important because its relevancy to honest arguments. You cast such a wide net here. I agree context is important, but I think you fail to understand my point. That bringing up 'context' is the last gasp of a failed argument. Usually done when context has been entirely exhausted and to further muddy the water so as to allow their failed argument to disappear into minutia. 

Its funny to watch conservatives argue. Much like a toddler trying to lie about something, you can see them visibly relax when the claim they just made is being called out. Their opponent is revving up to drop the hammer on the 'trust me bro' point that was just vomited. Interrupting part way through their tongue lashing to oppose a trivial point, the tension of the conservative is released when the opponent abandons the original train of thought to go down the rabbit hole of the trivial point. Never to return to the obvious bad or unfounded original argument. 

The claim about clinging to veracity of claims and not admitting their error is a human condition rather than conservative condition.  There are so many instances of people being proven wrong with data and nothing comes beyond insults, strawmen, and silence. Don't you dare 'both sides' this. That's very disingenuous. Which side is more open to not knowing the answer? The left. Which side is more in favor of funding research, areas of all types, in the hopes of finding the answer to things? The left. Which side uses ALL THE DATA, not just convenient little bits, to prove points and make change? The left. The conservative side is not supported by facts in any area. If there is one, I would love to see it. But considering the conversations that I've been privy to on this board for the last few years. I have yet to see one. At least not one that doesn't devolve into name calling, gas lighting, or outright lying. It's kind of pathetic that you all haven't realized it yet. But some do. More and more people raised conservative and/or religious grow to realize their parents did the best they could but were quite wrong at just about every turn. Leave the house and learn the real truth about the world. Show me a consistent opposition to that point and I'll show you a system built to make young people fail and crawl back home in the hopes of propagating the same scared conservative system. 

I am conservative.  You are not.

Let's try something.

Count up how many times you have admitted you were wrong and apologized on this forum.  

I will do the same.

You go first please. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

5 hours ago, JimmySpeaks said:

RV can’t handle other people being successful. 
TPT can’t handle being told he’s woke.  
Slip N Tweet is so mad he’s going after my deceased mom. 
 

such anger over stuff you can’t control. 

Every accusation is a confession

[JimmySpeaks]

Just now, ThreePointTakedown said:

Every accusation is a confession

You would know. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

2 hours ago, jross said:

I am conservative.  You are not.

Let's try something.

Count up how many times you have admitted you were wrong and apologized on this forum.  

I will do the same.

You go first please. 

I am conservative.  You are not. Guilty as charged. What are your positions on popular issues? Are they based in fact and reality?

Let's try something. 

Count up how many times you have admitted you were wrong and apologized on this forum.  

I will do the same.

You go first please. No. You laid down this challenge. As a show of good faith, since you have shown little in our past, you should be the honorable one and go first. 

Further more, I have apologized for misunderstanding someone's intentions or how they phrased certain things or if I misread. In my earlier days of posting much more frequently then recent days/months, I often was a few posts behind when crafting my response and was missing some (cough cough) context that was injected while away. But rarely if ever have I been proven factually wrong(I don't engage in conversations that are either boring or that I agree with already). Its a point of pride that just about all those that I have disagreed with either; handwave away my responses(either because they are too dumb or lazy to read and understand them before asking any clarifying questions), say its AI(common crashout from the right), or just call me names(always the sign of a winning argument).  If you have an example, I'd be happy, elated even, to see it. And would humbly apologize for whatever it was that rent me asunder from truth or fact. 

I am much more thorough in my arguments than, I feel, most people opposed to my ideas are used to considering. I can see how that could be intimidating but you all have the same resources that I do. I don't understand how you refuse to use them. But I think we all know why. You are emotionally attached to your opinions(THAT is something I agree that we all can do from time to time) but I have come to learn how to detach feelings from facts and data. Having a health combination of both isn't bad but being too emotional leads to bad data and being too data driven leads to a loss of humanity and empathy. I find the right is far too emotional and leads to a horrible combination that is the worst of both sides. No data, high emotions, no empathy, no humanity. And the use of debate tactics and not being forced to say what they really feel/think allows them just enough room to convince others that think just like them. No wonder the right is so anti-education and so pro-authoritarian, I'm sorry I meant religious. Having someone else to their thinking for them is the hallmark of the right. 

Thanks for allowing me a chance to rant. If you can prove me wrong, I'll be happy to apologize. 

[JimmySpeaks]

Just now, ThreePointTakedown said:

 

I am conservative.  You are not. Guilty as charged. What are your positions on popular issues? Are they based in fact and reality?

Let's try something. 

Count up how many times you have admitted you were wrong and apologized on this forum.  

I will do the same.

You go first please. No. You laid down this challenge. As a show of good faith, since you have shown little in our past, you should be the honorable one and go first. 

Further more, I have apologized for misunderstanding someone's intentions or how they phrased certain things or if I misread. In my earlier days of posting much more frequently then recent days/months, I often was a few posts behind when crafting my response and was missing some (cough cough) context that was injected while away. But rarely if ever have I been proven factually wrong(I don't engage in conversations that are either boring or that I agree with already). Its a point of pride that just about all those that I have disagreed with either; handwave away my responses(either because they are too dumb or lazy to read and understand them before asking any clarifying questions), say its AI(common crashout from the right), or just call me names(always the sign of a winning argument).  If you have an example, I'd be happy, elated even, to see it. And would humbly apologize for whatever it was that rent me asunder from truth or fact. 

I am much more thorough in my arguments than, I feel, most people opposed to my ideas are used to considering. I can see how that could be intimidating but you all have the same resources that I do. I don't understand how you refuse to use them. But I think we all know why. You are emotionally attached to your opinions(THAT is something I agree that we all can do from time to time) but I have come to learn how to detach feelings from facts and data. Having a health combination of both isn't bad but being too emotional leads to bad data and being too data driven leads to a loss of humanity and empathy. I find the right is far too emotional and leads to a horrible combination that is the worst of both sides. No data, high emotions, no empathy, no humanity. And the use of debate tactics and not being forced to say what they really feel/think allows them just enough room to convince others that think just like them. No wonder the right is so anti-education and so pro-authoritarian, I'm sorry I meant religious. Having someone else to their thinking for them is the hallmark of the right. 

Thanks for allowing me a chance to rant. If you can prove me wrong, I'll be happy to apologize. 

My mommy said you have to go first.  What a baby 

[Gene Mills Fan]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

 

1, Conservatives turn to the middle not extremes. Conservatives back behavior that has been corroborated as successful, and beneficial to the majority. Hard disagree there. Please offer a few examples so we have an idea of what it is you are talking about? Women in sports, 25% of liberals thinks violence is ok to change things 

2, Not everyone is correct 100% I'll take some mistakes as long as it just debate. If you are mostly correct, is the barometer, in live conversation without notations In live conversation, sure. With friends or acquaintances, I guess. If you don't have notes or enough information to cogently discuss a topic both for and against, you shouldn't pretend that you can. That is the definition of Dunning Kruger. Its doesn't or shouldn't diminish your sense of self worth that you can't honestly and accurately discuss a topic of relative importance. Understand and admit to yourself what you don't know and make a conscience decision to get better or learn more. But if you're on a web thread the whole 'no notes' thing is ponderous. We have ALL THE NOTES OF EVERYTHING EVER. Just figure out the best source, which the right tends to either not do, do badly, or pretend a source is reputable when its not. Hardly any policy or position the right holds is bore out by facts. Prove me wrong? we are talking about Charlies intelligence and truthfulness and data he uses in live conversation, no?

3. context is always important and to suggest it is a guilt process or deflecting is ridiculous. Examine what is said and meant not partial words picked out of an argument. Never said it wasn't important. What I said was that even after context is fully established and accepted and cannot be further dissected, the claim of 'its out of context' is a 'pull in case fire' card that many pundits on the right call on when they are trapped. Knowing full well that yelling at the top of their lungs is distraction enough to get the spot light off of them and not have to admit defeat or that their point has been thoroughly debunked.  all his memes are out of context why do libs present it as fact 

4. I think a mostly conservative approach to goernment has been directing success for thousands of years. I don't disagree with you although I would push back on your use of the word 'success'. That we haven't destroyed ourselves yet is not a great metric for 'success' in my opinion. The pattern of oligarchs gain and wield soft power and begin to steer the ship of government towards what best suites them and their needs, goes back thousands of years, yes. Eventually their arrogance/hubris gets the best of them and they are overthrown, invaded, or beheaded. Rinse repeat. If you're happy with that pattern, bully for you. I'm not to jazzed about the idea, myself. Tell me if you see any similarities in the scenario I put forth above and our current situation? I'll give you a hint, if you say 'no' you're just not trying that hard.  I'm not paranoid that is happening but I do think there are bad actors that steer too much no socialism will solve that

 

[jross]

46 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

My mommy said you have to go first.  What a baby 

 

 

 

[JimmySpeaks]

7 minutes ago, jross said:

 

 

 

Nah. All the libs in here love me.  

[jross]

1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

 

I am conservative.  You are not. Guilty as charged. What are your positions on popular issues? Are they based in fact and reality?

Let's try something. 

Count up how many times you have admitted you were wrong and apologized on this forum.  

I will do the same.

You go first please. No. You laid down this challenge. As a show of good faith, since you have shown little in our past, you should be the honorable one and go first. 

 

My pleasure.

 

Here is an example from you.  It starts out well.  Immediate and specific.  Acknowledges an error.  Then it falls off the rails into hostility.

 

Here is an example for me.

 

It is your turn.

Edited 14 hours ago by jross

[ThreePointTakedown]

48 minutes ago, jross said:

 

My pleasure.

 

Here is an example from you.  It starts out well.  Immediate and specific.  Acknowledges an error.  Then it falls off the rails into hostility.

 

Here is an example for me.

 

It is your turn.

Thanks for doing that leg work. 
I misread something then apologized for it. Bully!

I still hold that I don’t need to look for an apology until evidence is brought that I was factually wrong about a topic. 
Find that and I’ll gladly own up to it. But I’m not going back to look at all my posts. 

[jross]

It should be really easy for you @red viking and much harder for me. 

This example is an apology to you.

 

Edited 12 hours ago by jross

[jross]

The conservative adds a third example.  

... 'all conservatives'... SSSHALLENGEEE LOSTTT 

Quote

...Once confronted by the facts that they are wrong can they ever admit it? Never. Because they are looked down upon for admitting to anything that could be considered weak... (3PT)

Are you talking about CK or all conservatives? (JROSS)   Yes. Or at least all the conservatives I have seen/heard in the last 15 years.  (3PT)

 

Edited 12 hours ago by jross

[jross]

I apologize to both @red viking and @ThreePointTakedown for tagging the wrong member. 

[JimmySpeaks]

1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Thanks for doing that leg work. 
I misread something then apologized for it. Bully!

I still hold that I don’t need to look for an apology until evidence is brought that I was factually wrong about a topic. 
Find that and I’ll gladly own up to it. But I’m not going back to look at all my posts. 

There would be too many apologies you’d have to make is why you won’t 

[Tripnsweep]

Poor little Jimmy just trying to stay relevant and get attention however he can. Go ask your mom little Jimmy. Adults are talking here. 

[JimmySpeaks]