Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Bias and opinions- a reminder

Thread Locked

Posted Aug 29, '12 at 11:20pm

ComradeWolf

ComradeWolf

367 posts

While we all have opinions on something, and want to express them, lets remember a few things.
Don't badger a person of a different opinion then you, we are civilized, we don't need more fece throwing contests, as fun as they may be. Debate like men (or women). What I mean by that is, say you have a christian fundamentalist speaking his opinion on a subject. It might be blatantly what you may consider something wrong or just outright stupid. Or your that christian fundamentalist and you see that scientific radical posting something you consider heresy. Don't be rude and bash your debating partner, and merely respond with a rude or denouncing reply. Instead, be thorough with your response, if you want to be critical of their argument, qoute their points and make a counter argument, and if you have sources to back your claim, post them in your reply.

The other thing to remember is not to act superior or snobbish to someone, regardless of their ideals. I am a hypocrite for stating that as I am highly biased and have no intention to conceal it. However, biased as we may be, evaluate your opponents argument and please consider feelings. We may not all have the same mindset or idea's but we are all human. Only a few of us are zombies and they are blatantly obvious.

Im done repeating the what is posted above me, but it seems people don't like reading things with icons for some reason. Beunos dias.

 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 12:30am

nichodemus

nichodemus

13,299 posts

Knight

Telling us to be moderate in our discussions. It's not like it's exactly a tough nut to crack to understand.

 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 12:32am

314d1

314d1

3,962 posts

Telling us to be moderate in our discussions. It's not like it's exactly a tough nut to crack to understand.


You know, I thought it might be that for a second. Then I thought "But why would he post that? There is no way it can lead to any discussion. Would he just put up a random public service announcement? Does he think he is better then us or something? No, that would be stupid to make a thread for that. So it must be something else."
 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 1:00am

nichodemus

nichodemus

13,299 posts

Knight

You know, I thought it might be that for a second. Then I thought "But why would he post that? There is no way it can lead to any discussion. Would he just put up a random public service announcement? Does he think he is better then us or something? No, that would be stupid to make a thread for that. So it must be something else."


There's nothing wrong or peculiar in sparking off a debate on how we should conduct ourselves in a debate.
 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 1:10am

314d1

314d1

3,962 posts

There's nothing wrong or peculiar in sparking off a debate on how we should conduct ourselves in a debate.


It doesn't look like he is trying to spark a debate to me. It looks a whole lot more like he is trying to tell us how to act, without opening up any conversations. Ill start one anyway. Because I have nothing better to do.

Don't badger a person of a different opinion then you, we are civilized, we don't need more fece throwing contests, as fun as they may be.


And why not? Breaking down the opponents and showing the fault and stupidity of opposing arguments is one of the best ways to show them the faults and stupidity of their arguments.

Debate like men (or women).


Men (And women) can take an insult when it is deserved.

What I mean by that is, say you have a christian fundamentalist speaking his opinion on a subject. It might be blatantly what you may consider something wrong or just outright stupid. Or your that christian fundamentalist and you see that scientific radical posting something you consider heresy.


I see that all the time! I say they are wrong and that their ideas are stupid. An accurate statement much of the time, why should I not?

Don't be rude and bash your debating partner, and merely respond with a rude or denouncing reply. Instead, be thorough with your response, if you want to be critical of their argument, qoute their points and make a counter argument, and if you have sources to back your claim, post them in your reply.


I don't see why we can't do both.

The other thing to remember is not to act superior or snobbish to someone, regardless of their ideals


Isn't that what you are doing here, telling us that your ideas are better?

I am a hypocrite for stating that as I am highly biased and have no intention to conceal it.


And because you think that you are better then all us while trying to say that we shouldn't think that.

However, biased as we may be, evaluate your opponents argument and please consider feelings.


Since that is how women (And men) debate. Carefully considering everyone's feelings before they post.

And why would we do that? Part of arguing effectively is getting an emotional reaction from your opponent, why wouldn't we do such?

We may not all have the same mindset or idea's but we are all human. Only a few of us are zombies and they are blatantly obvious


Is that a racist comment? Some of my best friends are zombies.

Im done repeating the what is posted above me, but it seems people don't like reading things with icons for some reason. Beunos dias.


Icons? What?
 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 1:17am

nichodemus

nichodemus

13,299 posts

Knight

And why not? Breaking down the opponents and showing the fault and stupidity of opposing arguments is one of the best ways to show them the faults and stupidity of their arguments.


Also a sure fire way to fudge the discussion up into tactless mud slinging.


And why would we do that? Part of arguing effectively is getting an emotional reaction from your opponent, why wouldn't we do such?


No it isn't. The point of debate/discussion is to win with the strength of your reasoning, not how much tears you can accrue.

I have a feeling I know why he posted but I'm not going to state my hunch.
 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 1:26am

314d1

314d1

3,962 posts

Also a sure fire way to fudge the discussion up into tactless mud slinging.


Is it? I would like to see your data on this.

No it isn't. The point of debate/discussion is to win with the strength of your reasoning, not how much tears you can accrue.


It is for people who value logic and reasoning. People who, as the OP puts it, think all science is just hearsay are not going to listen to logic and reasoning. The religious fundamentalists rarely listen to anything you bring up, you should know this. There are three kinds of arguments, English class tells me, Ethos, Logos, and Pathos. Appeal to logic, emotion, and authority, if I remember correctly. If someone doesn't listen to logic, you must use emotion as a tool.

I have a feeling I know why he posted but I'm not going to state my hunch.


Really? You should have told me when I asked what the point of this thread was. It would have been useful information. Whatever, keep your secrets.
 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 1:42am

nichodemus

nichodemus

13,299 posts

Knight

Is it? I would like to see your data on this.


A dozen users off the top of my mind banned for these


It is for people who value logic and reasoning. People who, as the OP puts it, think all science is just hearsay are not going to listen to logic and reasoning. The religious fundamentalists rarely listen to anything you bring up, you should know this. There are three kinds of arguments, English class tells me, Ethos, Logos, and Pathos. Appeal to logic, emotion, and authority, if I remember correctly. If someone doesn't listen to logic, you must use emotion as a tool.


Yet we know not whether people will not respond to logic until we try them. Furthermore, there are different standards of emotion; those who use Ethos properly don't bog down into pure snarkiness and sarcasm that some like to use here.
 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 1:54am

314d1

314d1

3,962 posts

A dozen users off the top of my mind banned for these


Hardly links insults to flame wars.

Yet we know not whether people will not respond to logic until we try them.


And once you try them, to find them ineffective, you return to the emotional arguments.

Furthermore, there are different standards of emotion; those who use Ethos properly don't bog down into pure snarkiness and sarcasm that some like to use here.


Really? Many of the best speech givers in history have used snarkiness and sarcasm, and it is one of the most relateable forms of debating for the average man. Or are you saying you are better then them? People like Mark Twain have been using the beautiful tool of sarcasm and perfected it into an art form, it would be a shame to let that go to waste. And what would you say proper Ethos is, exactly? Showing the fault and stupidity of your opponents arguments seems like a pretty good use of it to me.
 

Posted Aug 30, '12 at 2:12am

Freakenstein

Freakenstein

9,286 posts

Moderator

And why not? Breaking down the opponents and showing the fault and stupidity of opposing arguments is one of the best ways to show them the faults and stupidity of their arguments.


There are ways to do disassemble someone's arguments/points without posting as if you're a prosecutor putting someone on trial for illegal ethics.

Men (And women) can take an insult when it is deserved.


You know there isn't room for insults in this forum. You say disassembling an opponent's argument is best to 'show them the faults and stupidity of their arguments', yet...

I see that all the time! I say they are wrong and that their ideas are stupid. An accurate statement much of the time, why should I not?


Beating them with a stick is only going to incite deep-seated hatred of the other side and further close their mind to any further thoughts on the matter.

...As has been demonstrated before whenever arguments like this arise.

Isn't that what you are doing here, telling us that your ideas are better?


You are thinking he's telling us that his ideas are better.

And because you think that you are better then all us while trying to say that we shouldn't think that.


How does your brain deduce that the Op is demonstrating superiority in his post?

And why would we do that? Part of arguing effectively is getting an emotional reaction from your opponent, why wouldn't we do such?


There is getting an emotional reaction from your opponent, then there is understanding the emotions from your opponent when debating, all the better to demonstrate your points and why theirs are faulty/persuading them to consider another side of an issue.

Hardly links insults to flame wars.


It's a mighty fine catalyst for such.

Or are you saying you are better then them


Alright, we need to talk about this "better than them/us" thing and about how you reach these conclusions. If nowhere in the passage suggests or implies superiority (which it doesn't) and you're getting this from your own thoughts, you need to seriously retract your last statement. Nobody enjoys opponents who get the wrong idea when the other side speaks, nor do they enjoy people who put words into their mouths. If you are one who fancies logic and deduction, then deduce the correct way and practice your preaching.

------------------------------------------------------------

As for the OP, the gesture is appreciated. We need more "coolness" when debating; however, there is a sticky that addresses the need for rationality and objective behavior already.