1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Debates and persuasion.

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Father Heathen, May 13, 2021.

  1. Father Heathen

    Father Heathen Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    34,333
    Ratings:
    +19,576
    "Winning" a debate might be satisfying, but is it really a "win" if nobody actually considers your viewpoint nor reevaluates their own? Due to wounded egos, people tend to double down rather than shift their position regardless of how thoroughly you pummel them with facts and logic, especially if they've conflated their very identity with it.
    So what is the most effective way to be persuasive and influential in this regard? How do you break through to get people to think critically and objectively?

    Calling them "dumdums" or "bootlickers" isn't an effective way to coax them into tasting your food for thought.
     
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Like Like x 2
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  2. Jimmy

    Jimmy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,628
    Ratings:
    +859
    Facts and logic are great But never revealed anything earth shattering to me
    To each their own
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Jimmy

    Jimmy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,628
    Ratings:
    +859
    The greatest facts I ever learned or things are reading writing and arithmetic
     
  4. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    19,524
    Ratings:
    +11,826
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I think it largely depends on what people are debating. While it may seem on the surface that people are arguing facts, it seems evident they're really arguing for their own philosophy or perception of the facts. There may not be any objectively "right" or "wrong" position to take, yet many people still seem to believe there is.

    There's also no objective way of determining who is the "winner" of a debate, at least not in an informal online forum such as RF.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Useful Useful x 1
  5. Vinayaka

    Vinayaka devotee
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    33,129
    Ratings:
    +17,912
    Religion:
    Saivite Hindu
    After a certain point, you just don't. You walk away, recognising it may take a lot more than you could ever offer. Hardwired is hardwired. There is lots of folk wisdom to this regard, like "You can't teach an old dog new tricks." So why bother?
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  6. JustGeorge

    JustGeorge Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2020
    Messages:
    2,551
    Ratings:
    +4,897
    Religion:
    Hindu
    I thought that's what the winner frubal was for.

    I sometimes wonder why people get so aggressive when their goal is to be heard and get their point across, especially if they intend to change someone's mind on a topic. "Well, I really thought my way was the right way, but then Joe Blow told me what a ******** I am, and I realized I was wrong". You just don't hear that....
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  7. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    6,226
    Ratings:
    +5,114
    It depends on what your goal is. If your goal is to persuade the person you're debating, then that person refusing to consider what you're saying or to reevaluate their position means you cannot say you've "won".

    If OTOH your focus is to persuade any "lurkers", then it's a bit nebulous, since the lurkers rarely post in the threads they lurk in. So you have no way of knowing whether or not you've been persuasive.

    And of course if your goal is to feel like you've successfully defended your own position and/or defeated the other person's, then whatever "win" you declare is entirely self-contained (and thus not very meaningful to anyone but yourself).

    Yep, very few folks will actually admit to being wrong in internet debates. For me, a good indication that I've successfully defeated a person's argument is when that person starts trying to shut the whole thing down by doing things like rapidly changing the subject, engaging in personal attacks, and/or walking away. People who are winning a debate rarely do those things.

    In most cases, I don't think it's possible in this medium. I think it's especially difficult in a forum where when someone is getting particularly embarrassed, they can complain to management and management will tell the other person to back off.

    Agreed. While name-calling can be fun in the short term, in the long run it mostly degrades your own credibility.

    The only other thing I'd mention is that for some folks (like me), getting a clear, declared win isn't the point of debating. Instead, just debating is, in itself, the point. As one psychological profile I took for work stated, I'm the type who likes to debate for its own sake, kind of like a sport.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Useful Useful x 1
  8. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    33,350
    Ratings:
    +11,696
    Religion:
    Inner Child Healing
    There is always something new to learn regardless the age and it's wise to learn from those who know less just as those who know more. It's humility. That, and I don't think many change their perspectives on things or at least consider the others opinions. If they do, it's probably superficial.

    But I don't agree that all debates needs a win or lose. Rather, it would help if we said that "I learned something new" from you.

    I don't know how one would win a religious debate based on ones conviction but I do believe we can learn from others if we don't feel we've learned enough. I think most religious paths teach life long learning outside one's own religion...but win, I don't expect that.

    That's just my bias and progressive culture based on observation. But I don't know. The only ones I see who learn are seekers. Not sure why they are perceived as such. We are all seekers. I agree. Our egos get in the way.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. ideogenous_mover

    ideogenous_mover Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    3,055
    Ratings:
    +784
    Religion:
    Agnostic with a Theistic bent, toward some form of Dualism
    My goal is never really to win, I just like to inject more thought into things, If I can. That is quite enough, if it is accomplished.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  10. MatthewA

    MatthewA Active Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2021
    Messages:
    775
    Ratings:
    +607
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yes it is very unkind to start making demands to and towards a person that they must see things your own way, which creates a tight rope of bondage around a person. Especially if it is someone in the Christian Faith making demands to you that you must only believe in what the bible says, or that you can not question the bible in what it says, or that someone demand or say because you do not agree with them even while believing in Jesus Christ ~ One cuts off the other brother. ( 1 John 4:20-21 If a person hates his brother yet says they love God )

    According to the bible in what it says it expresses many ways a (Christian believers of the God of the Holy Bible, and the Lord Jesus Christ ~ by the spirit respond and act different than how the world responds. There are many different scriptures in the bible that talk about these things which are quite profound. Though many people may not believe in God of the Holy Bible, or the Lord Jesus Christ, that is okay. My encouragement would be to go and see what the bible it self has to tell you and speak to you about God, and the Lord Jesus Christ and decide for yourself, even ask God to help in prayer, but that is a choice all people have to make.

    It kind of unfortunate that it seems to me so many people have missed out getting to the know Jesus Christ and it is easy to come across the bible, it is very difficult to sit and read it. Even for me. It is difficult to sit there and read though have done many times (the New Testament). Also had a nice teacher who helped along the way named (Shawn Mcranny from Heart of the Matter on Youtube), also learned from another man named Paul Washer.

    For me it is that I find tremendous value in the Holy Bible, and the information that it has to inform people about God, and the Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, and Acts of the Apostles along with the Apostles expanding more information about God and Jesus Christ through out the context of the new testament especially. God is good, God is love, God is spirit, God does not lie, God does not tempt.

    Though do not take my work for it, check it out for yourself cause it is possible that I am wrong.

    And just because we disagree or whatever it might be (I personally) could never hate anyone. Disagreements are part of life which you can learn from.

    It is very unkind to start making demands to and towards a person that they must see things your own way, which creates a tight rope of bondage around a person.
     
    #10 MatthewA, May 13, 2021
    Last edited: May 13, 2021
  11. stvdv

    stvdv Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    12,508
    Ratings:
    +7,130
    Religion:
    Sanathana Dharma [The Eternal Religion]
    :D:cool:;)

    Those that do bother, and keep on trying to convince others, are not yet convinced about the truth of:
    "You can't teach an old dog new tricks."
     
    #11 stvdv, May 13, 2021
    Last edited: May 14, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    19,524
    Ratings:
    +11,826
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I think internet arguments are comparable to this:

    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  13. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    4,974
    Ratings:
    +217
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Basic observation human natural life owner.

    Any human life in past deceased.

    Humans only alive today.

    Each day holy if life is still alive.

    Today two human adult bodies exist. Can have sex conceive beginnings new human life in one day.

    Human advice about self.

    No human alive in any past.
    No future either as gas heavens is a self present natural same mass that should remain constant.

    Human thought reality.

    Observed living. Parents can survive about one hundred years then die.

    We are only human surviving a life.

    No coercion. Lived observed natural reality.

    If I have to try and persuade natural reality then obviously you own a mind dysfunction.
     
  14. lewisnotmiller

    lewisnotmiller Grand Hat
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    19,600
    Ratings:
    +11,958
    Religion:
    atheist
    This won't help anyone 'solve' this, as it's a very long-term strategy, but it's a holdover from my teaching days.
    Teaching from a young age the ability to be able to identify bias, and use critical reading skills, as well as idea around sourcing, confirmation, etc, are increasingly vital skills for people to have.
    Being able to understand how information can be position and manipulated, and that all sources...even 'unbiased' ones...have a perspective and position does at least encourage critical evaluation of information.

    At some point, I'd hope that academic rigour is turned on all information and sources, including those we ourselves and providing to others.

    The nice thing about this is that it's not related to which 'side' of things you believe in. These skills, and approach are agnostic.
     
  15. lewisnotmiller

    lewisnotmiller Grand Hat
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    19,600
    Ratings:
    +11,958
    Religion:
    atheist
    Yup...this resonates.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. RestlessSoul

    RestlessSoul Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2021
    Messages:
    768
    Ratings:
    +660
    Religion:
    Agnostic Lapsed Catholic
    If one party to a debate is unwilling to learn anything from the other party, the conversation soon becomes futile.

    When both parties are equally wedded to their own intransigence, you get those pointless circuitous arguments, akin to medieval ruminations on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

    Those last can be entertaining to read through, for the neutral observer.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    4,974
    Ratings:
    +217
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    As an equal human I learnt not from my bias towards religion but human cruelty.

    So I asked questions to an over conscious answerer where info was proven accurate by dictionary reference or encyclopaedia.

    I was not seeking intellectual advice.

    So I said previous human self experience was giving me answers . Knowing I'm always just learning.

    Asking a question how does a burning converting science condition be forgiven.

    The answer it wasn't. Life was sacrificed as proof.

    The reaction reacted is full change. Not saved reaction owns no intention of saving. If a reaction was saved it reacts. If a reaction was a theory it was thought only.

    All conscious answers to men lying in science.

    A human is not any reaction learnt.

    Mind scientist theist thinks results. Observed results as a false creator.

    First says I was saved I never changed. Theist review of self observation.

    In reality your brother was attacked as humans aren't science. Ignored advice. Brain irradiated became a term smart self. Know it all scientist lying.

    Mind says I must have been forgiven knowing self really deserved instant karma. As reaction controller.

    Law karma not instant.
    Law karma harms another human so other human is then coerced by the self who harmed us the scientist claims you must have deserved it.

    Conscious overview hidden is heard says the result of man science self confessing I am wrong. Knew consciously he was. Outwardly made excuses.

    I don't deserve life harm. His status.
    No one else was meant to be harmed either. My intention just reaction.

    Was not my intention harm. Origin scientist human theist thinker. Reviewed observed caused results. Change and attack.

    Chose to coerce by being guilty.

    Today could care less and would harm anyone to be rich and in control.

    Proving he has lost his conscious excuses. Proving his sense of knowing self was wrong is gone.

    I am only hearing it as a re recorded state.

    Coercion sophism cunning contrivance to believe you were forgiven.

    Human knew highest self was natural healthy and was not doing wrong.

    What did I do is our question.

    Answer your brother the scientist lied.

    Real theme water gets replaced by long flooding incidences atmosphere cools. Life however remains harmed DNA damaged.

    Forgiveness would not allow change as a human who expresses forgiveness would not cause harm in the first incident. Rationality a spiritual man did harm then lied about it.

    Forgiveness never first existed as we were natural.

    Human self knows if I was forgiven for not doing anything wrong then I should not be changed. Self advice.

    My brother human lies. Coercive persuasion Sion the science words.
     
  18. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,606
    Ratings:
    +8,320
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    The truth is that you can't.
     
  19. joe1776

    joe1776 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    4,546
    Ratings:
    +1,744
    Religion:
    None
    I recommend making arguments that will persuade intelligent, unbiased minds. In this forum, that's unlikely to be your debate opponent, but there might be a reader or two that will be persuaded.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    60,212
    Ratings:
    +17,996
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    I'm often not trying to convince the person I'm debating to change their mind on the main issue of the debate.

    Often, my reason for debating someone is something like:

    - convince the lurkers/spectators who are on the fence.
    - see how strong my own arguments are by exposing them to criticism.
    - venting about an issue when I can't confront people about it in real life.
    - convince my opponent of some side issue (e.g. that their opponents have valid concerns, or that their opinion isn't as popular as they think it is).
    - show people who I agree with that there's someone else on their side.
    - simply to speak out (as Dr. King said, "your life begins to end the moment you start being silent about the things that matter.").


    I think insults are a tool in the toolbox. They certainly aren't one to be used often, but they have their time and place.

    And as for wounded egos: yes, saving face is a big thing, but I'm convinced - without good evidence, admittedly - that some of the extremist posters who show up here for a while and then abruptly leave and up joining some other discussion board with a different username, having reinvented themselves with more moderate views.

    Just because someone doesn't come out and "yes, you were right and I was wrong" doesn't mean that minds aren't being changed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...