Winning and Losing in the Debates

So why debate? Why not just simply talk, discuss? Learn?I remember the academic forensics clubs and societies in high school. Regardless of whichever position you actually took, you learned to take whatever position you were assigned and then to take that position in your arguments. Mind you, that is a very valuable skill to develop in a lawyer.I remember an anecdote about the lawyer Abraham Lincoln. In the morning, he argued before a judge a particular legal point that he convinced the judge. In the evening of the same day, he argued before the same judge the completely opposite legal point and still convinced the judge. When that judge questioned him about it, he dissembled that he was confused that morning, but he was clear about his reasoning that afternoon.I vividly remember the very first time that I had ever heard anything about the founder of "intelligent design", lawyer Phillip Johnson. And the only thing I could ever think of thinking was, "What a completely fucking idiot!"I mean, there he was all about court procedures and court rules for evidence and all I could think of was, just what the fuck are we trying to accomplish here? Just why the fuck is he going on and on about court procedures and rules when in reality we are just trying to conduct a bloody police investigation.Sorry, but just how the fuck does all this real-life shit go down?In short, you conduct your police investigation in order to uncover all the facts. Then you use those facts to make your legal case.Those are two very different paths to take.