Total Posts:2|Showing Posts:1-2
Jump to topic:

dropped arguments and concessions

philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 11:49:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Some people, when they initiate a debate, will include the rule that dropped argument count as concessions. I don't like that rule. Suppose some made the following argument:

1. All men are mortal.
2. Socrates is a man.
3. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

And suppose the only response given to this argument is something like, "If Socrates is mortal, then I'm a monkey's uncle." Should the first person really be required to address that point? I don't think so. I'd rather just let the voters decide if that's a good enough response. I'd rather not use up my limited space in addressing it. I'd rather use my space to address arguments that are worth responding to. If it turns out that the voters think my opponent's response to my argument really refutes my argument, then they can vote against me, but I don't think they should vote against me if I made an argument, and they honestly don't think my opponent refuted it with his/her silly comment that I ignored or dropped.

What do you think?
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2012 12:10:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/16/2012 11:49:00 PM, philochristos wrote:
Some people, when they initiate a debate, will include the rule that dropped argument count as concessions. I don't like that rule. Suppose some made the following argument:

1. All men are mortal.
2. Socrates is a man.
3. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

And suppose the only response given to this argument is something like, "If Socrates is mortal, then I'm a monkey's uncle." Should the first person really be required to address that point? I don't think so. I'd rather just let the voters decide if that's a good enough response. I'd rather not use up my limited space in addressing it. I'd rather use my space to address arguments that are worth responding to. If it turns out that the voters think my opponent's response to my argument really refutes my argument, then they can vote against me, but I don't think they should vote against me if I made an argument, and they honestly don't think my opponent refuted it with his/her silly comment that I ignored or dropped.

What do you think?

Well, that's up to the voter. I don't really care if an idiotic argument is refuted or not. I'm not going to reward an idiotic argument with points in its favor because it was left unscathed. That would be... well... just unethical.
Tsar of DDO