Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

Basics Needed for me to Debate Effectivley.

ShortWinded
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2013 11:29:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well first of all I guess it is best to follow the leading trend of this site. And that most definatley is being polite and thanking my readers for reading.
And to furthermore to thank whoever replies to this post with helpful information.

It seems that the best debators on here have the inherrent ability (at least from the few I happened to read) to rather out manovure their oponent with longwinded debates/counters and massive amounts of research to support.

As I have never debated before. That amount of effort just seems over the top.
I guess ultimatley to effectivley debate such efforts become necessary.
But having said that. Sans massive amounts of research and large paragraphs supporting whatever you are trying to counter/enforce/re-inforce your position what else counts?
Considering my account is only a few minutes old. (and I particularly abhor research)
I have not put any effort into "researching" this page as to what makes people win or loos debates... And I'd would rather not.
So. What I am thinking of doing is just saying what I believe point form will help win arguments and what will loose them. Then some questions on "character" And then... Hope for some people to help me out!! Thank you if you are one!

To Present correctly
*Bringing your topic forward in a Position paper style. Intro-points...Middle-explination..Conclusion-quick re-summary
*References to facts given (proof)
As I looked into my head just now. I could not think of anyhting really past whats written above to present correctly. All other aspects are as I see it are places for you individually to just "not stumble"

*Reference to personal accounts as they could always be scewed as bias?
*Spelling grammar diction... Poor use would indicate a for lack of a better word stupidity
*Provoking statements towards oponent? Wouln't a well presented arguement essentially need no defence of dignity/honour.
It seems botn winners and loosers are very provocative towards eachother... Bit of a weak trait in prople. Seems foolish to emplore such tactics.

So lets say all points given and then countered balance at a perfect 50/50. What then will make a debate winnable...
Essentially at that point. "debate wise" it would be a draw...
If thats the case. Haha I dont actually understand the very point of debate. Everything should just go into a computer and have it measured/calculated.
But as always humans loooooove to argue/debate about things essentially unanswerable due to opinion. As I just opinionated you see *wink wink*

"Character" (remember when the debate is 50/50 what wins it?)
Personal character is what wins theese things right?
Being a Churchill of the masses?
Providing leadership traits through your charasma? (leaders are loved and hated. But always looked upon when in need of a proactive decision)
Perhaps being so prolific that your intentions are not wholly grasped? Therefore coming across as enigmatic. Hahah or just a fickle fool attempting too much.

Okay to close... I am not looking for suggestions of books to read or webpages to gleen info off. "debate for dummies 101 " No thanks.
I am just after some simple hints and straightforward answers. Id way rather stumble through the first few steps somewhat blindly than prepare.
Mostly I am here because I know I have a relativly strong mind and I wish to better it. (spelling bee champs may think otherwise.... Thankfully there is mocrosoft word when I need it)
I am sure that if this message were a phalanx it would be full of holes for you to debate your way into my flanks.
Nonetheless please feel free to give your opinion and advice.
And If you wish to thwart a newcomer let me know...

Douglas Castle
Aka ShortWinded
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2013 11:29:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Just noob-snipe.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2013 11:31:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
So the username is ironic, right?
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
larztheloser
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 4:18:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
"So lets say all points given and then countered balance at a perfect 50/50. What then will make a debate winnable..."

This is incorrect. If all points are countered then the side with the burden of proof has not met it. This is one of only two reasons why burden of proof exists (the second is for if nobody has managed to rebut anybody).
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 12:30:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Unfortunately, research is rather vital. You can't make solid arguments without having backed facts and studies to support them, and you can't counter your opponent's arguments without the same. While there are many "non-research" points that can greatly help, they will do very little if you do not do just basic research into the topic.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 1:03:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
When having debates about social issues, marginalize the individual by using the hate,race,or bigot card and character assassination thus forcing him or her to spend their whole time trying to prove they are not, which they can't. But the best part about this strategy is merely implying it is all you need to do. You need give no sources or evidence. Espeacially if it is deemed a politically incorrect position to hold. He or she is a hater a racist a bigot or a person of poor character by default because it was implied. This works especially well in debates about gay marrige and issues regarding the poor and minorities.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 2:36:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 4:18:53 AM, larztheloser wrote:
"So lets say all points given and then countered balance at a perfect 50/50. What then will make a debate winnable..."

This is incorrect. If all points are countered then the side with the burden of proof has not met it. This is one of only two reasons why burden of proof exists (the second is for if nobody has managed to rebut anybody).

Debates don't work like that anyway. No argument counters another "50/50", they are either convicing, unconvincing, or the vague area inbetween: never that specific.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 2:40:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 12:30:15 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Unfortunately, research is rather vital. You can't make solid arguments without having backed facts and studies to support them, and you can't counter your opponent's arguments without the same. While there are many "non-research" points that can greatly help, they will do very little if you do not do just basic research into the topic.

That depends on the topic. Philosophical arguments require little to no research, just logic. That is why I prefer these types of debates, I hate researching for a debate. It often becomes a game of who is better at using Google.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 2:42:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 1:03:33 PM, sadolite wrote:
When having debates about social issues, marginalize the individual by using the hate,race,or bigot card and character assassination thus forcing him or her to spend their whole time trying to prove they are not, which they can't. But the best part about this strategy is merely implying it is all you need to do. You need give no sources or evidence. Espeacially if it is deemed a politically incorrect position to hold. He or she is a hater a racist a bigot or a person of poor character by default because it was implied. This works especially well in debates about gay marrige and issues regarding the poor and minorities.

^

As you can see, he's quite the expert.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 2:47:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I prefer having non-philosophical debates because philosophical ones usually turn into arguments about the semantics and meanings about specific words. Sometimes, research is burdensome but the best arguments are ones that are built upon a factual basis. I wouldn't support quoting sources verbatim but rather making original arguments and backing the factual basis of those arguments with sources.

Studies are also never clear cut. In any study, there are a lot of flaws and limitations and arguing why certain research performed under certain specific conditions is better is an interesting argument by itself. Even more so than philosophical arguments because of the concrete facts from which the opinions of the debaters stem from rather than merely the meaning of words.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 2:53:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 2:40:33 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 2/23/2013 12:30:15 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Unfortunately, research is rather vital. You can't make solid arguments without having backed facts and studies to support them, and you can't counter your opponent's arguments without the same. While there are many "non-research" points that can greatly help, they will do very little if you do not do just basic research into the topic.

That depends on the topic. Philosophical arguments require little to no research, just logic. That is why I prefer these types of debates, I hate researching for a debate. It often becomes a game of who is better at using Google.

But you still have to be well versed in philosophy which requires either a good background, or google.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 3:01:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 2:47:18 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
I prefer having non-philosophical debates because philosophical ones usually turn into arguments about the semantics and meanings about specific words. Sometimes, research is burdensome but the best arguments are ones that are built upon a factual basis. I wouldn't support quoting sources verbatim but rather making original arguments and backing the factual basis of those arguments with sources.

Studies are also never clear cut. In any study, there are a lot of flaws and limitations and arguing why certain research performed under certain specific conditions is better is an interesting argument by itself. Even more so than philosophical arguments because of the concrete facts from which the opinions of the debaters stem from rather than merely the meaning of words.

It really depends on what you want out of a debate. Fact based debates can teach you a lot about what is going in in the world. Philosophical debates can teach you a lot about how to look at it. I prefer the latter because I find it more stimulating. I also enjoy exploring my "inner-self". That is when you believe something but don't really know why because you haven't fully thought it through; it just feels right. The ability to turn that feeling into words and coherent logic which can then be communicated is strengthened through these debates which is invaluable in to a person as they take on the world. It's been a tremendous help to me anyway.

Not sure where I was going with that, just rambling...
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 3:03:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 2:53:58 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 2/23/2013 2:40:33 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 2/23/2013 12:30:15 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Unfortunately, research is rather vital. You can't make solid arguments without having backed facts and studies to support them, and you can't counter your opponent's arguments without the same. While there are many "non-research" points that can greatly help, they will do very little if you do not do just basic research into the topic.

That depends on the topic. Philosophical arguments require little to no research, just logic. That is why I prefer these types of debates, I hate researching for a debate. It often becomes a game of who is better at using Google.

But you still have to be well versed in philosophy which requires either a good background, or google.

Inevitably it plays a role, but in many fact based topics it matters little.
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 5:21:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 2:40:33 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 2/23/2013 12:30:15 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Unfortunately, research is rather vital. You can't make solid arguments without having backed facts and studies to support them, and you can't counter your opponent's arguments without the same. While there are many "non-research" points that can greatly help, they will do very little if you do not do just basic research into the topic.

That depends on the topic. Philosophical arguments require little to no research, just logic. That is why I prefer these types of debates, I hate researching for a debate. It often becomes a game of who is better at using Google.

As well as, though not necessarily so, a test of prior expertise or familiarity with the subject.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 9:52:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 2:42:00 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 2/23/2013 1:03:33 PM, sadolite wrote:
When having debates about social issues, marginalize the individual by using the hate,race,or bigot card and character assassination thus forcing him or her to spend their whole time trying to prove they are not, which they can't. But the best part about this strategy is merely implying it is all you need to do. You need give no sources or evidence. Espeacially if it is deemed a politically incorrect position to hold. He or she is a hater a racist a bigot or a person of poor character by default because it was implied. This works especially well in debates about gay marrige and issues regarding the poor and minorities.

^

As you can see, he's quite the expert.

Are you suggesting this is not done with extreame effectivness?
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 11:44:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Writing coherently is most important. Run the spell checker, put sentences into paragraphs, and leave a line after each paragraph.

The best debates are well-researched, however, many debates on the site have no research. Often a single google search would have gotten enough to have won, but debaters don't even do that much.

Read the tutorial threads at the top of the debate.org forum and follow those suggestions.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 12:45:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/22/2013 11:29:03 PM, ShortWinded wrote:
Well first of all I guess it is best to follow the leading trend of this site. And that most definatley is being polite and thanking my readers for reading.
And to furthermore to thank whoever replies to this post with helpful information.

It seems that the best debators on here have the inherrent ability (at least from the few I happened to read) to rather out manovure their oponent with longwinded debates/counters and massive amounts of research to support.

As I have never debated before. That amount of effort just seems over the top.
I guess ultimatley to effectivley debate such efforts become necessary.
But having said that. Sans massive amounts of research and large paragraphs supporting whatever you are trying to counter/enforce/re-inforce your position what else counts?

You must be able to ascertain which points directly refute or affirm the resolution, and to prioritize those points above others. This may seem trivial, but some people like to incessantly strawman to obfuscate their main point.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?