Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   I read that "there are no winners in this debate"
Jeremy
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 48 (251481)
10-13-2005 2:39 PM


Are there winners in debates? If there are could you tell me how one "wins" a debate. I'm very new at all this so abbreviations mean nothing to me so if I could get a list of some of the abbreviations I would find that very helpful. Not only so I could use them but so that I could understand some of the things said to me in others replies to what I said. Any help you can give me here I would find very useful. Thanks.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by robinrohan, posted 10-13-2005 2:48 PM Jeremy has not replied
 Message 5 by Chiroptera, posted 10-13-2005 5:01 PM Jeremy has not replied
 Message 7 by crashfrog, posted 10-13-2005 5:48 PM Jeremy has not replied
 Message 14 by NosyNed, posted 10-13-2005 7:43 PM Jeremy has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 48 (251483)
10-13-2005 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jeremy
10-13-2005 2:39 PM


Are there winners in debates?
On this fourm? You bet. If you win, you get prizes and stuff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jeremy, posted 10-13-2005 2:39 PM Jeremy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by robinrohan, posted 10-13-2005 3:22 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 48 (251492)
10-13-2005 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by robinrohan
10-13-2005 2:48 PM


Just to give you an example, there is this one poster, who goes by the name of Faith, who won so many debates she was awarded the prestigious position of "moderator" (like an umpire). Pretty impressive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by robinrohan, posted 10-13-2005 2:48 PM robinrohan has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2005 3:23 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 4 of 48 (251495)
10-13-2005 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by robinrohan
10-13-2005 3:22 PM


ha!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by robinrohan, posted 10-13-2005 3:22 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 48 (251512)
10-13-2005 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jeremy
10-13-2005 2:39 PM


Some members
(who shall remain nameless)
feel that if you repeat the exact same thing over and over again, regardless of the responses of your opponents, then you win the debate.
Edited by AdminBen to remove inappropriate content.
This message has been edited by AdminBen, Thursday, 2005/10/13 04:13 PM

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jeremy, posted 10-13-2005 2:39 PM Jeremy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2005 5:29 PM Chiroptera has not replied
 Message 13 by AdminBen, posted 10-13-2005 7:12 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 6 of 48 (251515)
10-13-2005 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Chiroptera
10-13-2005 5:01 PM


use not vain repetitions, as the heathens do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Chiroptera, posted 10-13-2005 5:01 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-15-2005 3:25 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 7 of 48 (251519)
10-13-2005 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jeremy
10-13-2005 2:39 PM


Win Conditions
If there are could you tell me how one "wins" a debate.
Victory is, of course, informal, but you're generally considered to win when one or more of the following conditions is met:
1) Your opponent leaves the forum.
2) Your opponent stops addressing your points and begins to post nothing but invective directed at you.
3) Your opponent changes the subject and refuses to respond to attempts to change it back.
4) Your opponent declares victory.
That last one is especially crucial. Nobody who wins debates declares victory during the debate. Later, you may refer to a victory, but declaring victory while the debate still rages is always a dodge to conceal a losing position; that's certainly how its going to be percieved.
Also, there's a general internet loss condition called "Godwin's Law", roughly defined as "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." The implication is that the first participant to make an improper comparison to Hitler or Nazis (generally in the form of an ad hominem) automatically loses the argument.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jeremy, posted 10-13-2005 2:39 PM Jeremy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Chiroptera, posted 10-13-2005 5:51 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 20 by nator, posted 10-13-2005 9:10 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 48 (251520)
10-13-2005 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by crashfrog
10-13-2005 5:48 PM


Re: Win Conditions
Hey, good idea, crash! I have another one for you:
Your opponent starts talking about the motivations for your opinions, how you must really feel.

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by crashfrog, posted 10-13-2005 5:48 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 10-13-2005 5:56 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 9 of 48 (251524)
10-13-2005 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Chiroptera
10-13-2005 5:51 PM


Re: Win Conditions
Your opponent starts talking about the motivations for your opinions, how you must really feel.
Mm, good one. Here's another - when your opponent dismisses what you actually wrote and replies to what he knows you actually meant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Chiroptera, posted 10-13-2005 5:51 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by robinrohan, posted 10-13-2005 6:09 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 26 by Jazzns, posted 10-14-2005 10:55 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 48 (251527)
10-13-2005 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by crashfrog
10-13-2005 5:56 PM


Re: Win Conditions
A handy way to win is to toss out various names of fallacies. A couple of these and it's generally over. It is not necessary to explain in what way the opponent has employed the fallacy. A mere labelling will do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 10-13-2005 5:56 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Parasomnium, posted 10-13-2005 6:13 PM robinrohan has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 11 of 48 (251530)
10-13-2005 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by robinrohan
10-13-2005 6:09 PM


Re: Win Conditions
It also helps if you call them 'falluses' instead of 'fallacies'. It usually results in crashfrogs win condition no. 1.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by robinrohan, posted 10-13-2005 6:09 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by robinrohan, posted 10-13-2005 6:18 PM Parasomnium has not replied
 Message 22 by Phat, posted 10-14-2005 4:55 AM Parasomnium has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 48 (251533)
10-13-2005 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Parasomnium
10-13-2005 6:13 PM


Re: Win Conditions
Asking politely if your opponent is "on drugs" is an excellent argumentative technique.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Parasomnium, posted 10-13-2005 6:13 PM Parasomnium has not replied

  
AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 48 (251556)
10-13-2005 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Chiroptera
10-13-2005 5:01 PM


Unnecessary.
Forum Guidelines writes:
10. Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.
Chiro,
Feel free to make jokes about your buddies here. Be much more careful and considerate of your debate partners. I don't see how the poster you're "not mentioning" would take this as anything other than an insult.
There's no need for it.
I've edited out the content. Please consider this a warning as well; I don't want to revisit this topic.
Complaints? Comments? Questions? Follow the appropriate link in the sig.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures

  • Thread Reopen Requests

  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
  • New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
  • "Post of the Month Forum"

  • "Columnist's Corner" Forum
  • See also Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 5 by Chiroptera, posted 10-13-2005 5:01 PM Chiroptera has not replied

      
    NosyNed
    Member
    Posts: 8996
    From: Canada
    Joined: 04-04-2003


    Message 14 of 48 (251569)
    10-13-2005 7:43 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Jeremy
    10-13-2005 2:39 PM


    Winning and Acronyms
    The "winning" is if you learn something. You learn how to present you own views more clearly and find out errors in your facts or line of reasoning.
    Winning is also learning about what others believe and what thinking processes they use.
    There is a tiny chance here of actually changing anyone else's mind in a major way. That shouldn't be your aim.
    In formal debates with a moderator the audience decides who wins or the moderator or a panel of judges. That isn't what we do here unless we have a "Great Debate" topic.
    Acronyms:
    They all fly out of my mind when I try to tying of them:
    OP -- the opening post of a thread. Generally msg number 1.
    OT -- off topic, a post that is discussing something not related to the OP
    IIRC -- If I Recall Correctly -- a reminder to yourself more than others that you may have this wrong -- also letting us know that you are "winging it" from memory.
    This message has been edited by NosyNed, 10-13-2005 07:44 PM

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Jeremy, posted 10-13-2005 2:39 PM Jeremy has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 15 by robinrohan, posted 10-13-2005 8:20 PM NosyNed has not replied

      
    robinrohan
    Inactive Member


    Message 15 of 48 (251570)
    10-13-2005 8:20 PM
    Reply to: Message 14 by NosyNed
    10-13-2005 7:43 PM


    Re: Winning and Acronyms
    IMO--in my opinion.
    IMHO--in my humble opinion
    IMVVHO--I have no knowledge of what I'm talking about
    ABE--added by edit
    Bump--this term was explained to me, but I still don't get it

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 14 by NosyNed, posted 10-13-2005 7:43 PM NosyNed has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 16 by crashfrog, posted 10-13-2005 8:35 PM robinrohan has replied
     Message 18 by AdminAsgara, posted 10-13-2005 8:37 PM robinrohan has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024