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!

Support for credibility or to convince

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Unveiled Artist, Oct 25, 2020.

  1. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Windmills of your mind

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    29,482
    Ratings:
    +9,731
    Religion:
    Process of Spiritual Healing
    When I think of a debate, I think of a conversation to where each party makes a claim or statement of fact or opinion and the hallmark of debate is to support what they say whether for or against the argument at hand. When someone counters a claim, there should be support their counterclaim just as the person whom makes the claim.

    That is different than doing so to convince. When you convince, you're trying to sway someone to fall into your line of thinking or opinion. Debates do not do this. Instead, you present an argument, you establish why you are an expert in that argument, and the point is whose argument (not the person making it) is much more logical than the other. The other problem is finding an agreed on criteria to judge whether either person made a sound argument. However, the intentions is not to convince the other person that your views are correct but its to convince by support that you know what you're talking about because the support is credible regardless how odd the claim may be.
     
  2. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    9,747
    Ratings:
    +7,097
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age influence
    I disagree with most of this :D . You can debate to persuade either the person you are arguing with or the crowd.

    So since you said people must support what they say in Debates... let's see your proof?
     
  3. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Windmills of your mind

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    29,482
    Ratings:
    +9,731
    Religion:
    Process of Spiritual Healing
    It's a person choice to persuade others if that's your intention for debate. However, debates regardless if you want to persuade or not should always present support with whatever claim and counterclaim they may make. It lends credibility to the person making it or countering it. If not, it's an empty debate.

    I didn't present an example, so what do you mean by proof?
     
  4. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    9,747
    Ratings:
    +7,097
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age influence
    You put a thread in Debates with a great many points, said people must prove their argument, telling people how to debate, and I asked for proof that this is how you debate and that it's not just a wishlist of how debates should be. One way of proving your side is going to Wikipedia and finding the rules of debate.

    I'm simply playing by your rules that one must prove their argument. In my world, it's more informal than that and not that exact.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Windmills of your mind

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    29,482
    Ratings:
    +9,731
    Religion:
    Process of Spiritual Healing
    I was just going off most common definition of the term.

    "They will use examples and evidence to support their ideas while working towards a conclusion. The aim of a debate is to convince the opposition that you are right. When the two sides agree on the subject or when one side's arguments are more convincing than the other side that is when the debate comes to a close."

    Mostly I see people trying to convince other people "they" are right rather than the argument being "right" or logical in itself regardless the emotional attachment and/or how odd that argument may be.

    -Support their claim. You don't have to support it "to prove" you're correct. You prove your argument is sound. It's just common courtesy to establish why you're the expert in the topic you present or the claims against it.
     
  6. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    9,747
    Ratings:
    +7,097
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age influence
    What about in cases where people play devil's advocate?

    Where I disagree is that the winner of a debate is never really about the proofs. It's a combination of the proof, the best side and who was the best arguer. And who was the best arguer often factors in greatly.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    9,747
    Ratings:
    +7,097
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age influence
    Screenshot_20201025-141124~2.png

    Debate - Wikipedia

    You can also make an emotional appeal to the audience - within reason.
     
  8. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    2,707
    Ratings:
    +1,308
    Religion:
    Some Nonsense
    Fortunately, the people I find myself in debates with never need to support their arguments with evidence or facts, as they are always debating from a position of self-evident, obviously-correct truth.
     
  9. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Windmills of your mind

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    29,482
    Ratings:
    +9,731
    Religion:
    Process of Spiritual Healing
    Yeah. It's mostly a combination. I think it's more effective to focus on the argument and convincing the other person the credibility of their argument. The closer a person is to proving the arguer is right or wrong, more emotions become involved.

    Who would decide the best side, though? Even if both parties can understand the logic of each other's side without needing to agree would be something. However, if the debate is based on who is the best arguer, which would be the criteria to make that decision?
     
  10. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    9,747
    Ratings:
    +7,097
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age influence
    It may work though as appealing to the audience, rather than your opponent, is really in my opinion the best way of winning a debate.
     
  11. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    9,747
    Ratings:
    +7,097
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age influence
    The crowd decides who wins in a debate.

    Any other motives like convincing the other side is just an added bonus.
     
  12. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    2,707
    Ratings:
    +1,308
    Religion:
    Some Nonsense
    I don't debate to "win" anything.
    I just get easily irritated by what I perceive as unfairness and double standards.
     
  13. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    9,747
    Ratings:
    +7,097
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age influence
    Another animal to tackle is political debates - is rhetoric allowed in them much like so much rhetoric is allowed in Presidential/Vice Presidential debates? Or do the standard rules of debate shape them with no exception?
     
  14. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    2,707
    Ratings:
    +1,308
    Religion:
    Some Nonsense
    Aren't all debates just "rhetoric"?
     
  15. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Windmills of your mind

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    29,482
    Ratings:
    +9,731
    Religion:
    Process of Spiritual Healing
    I'm thinking of a debate where the rules have been set and judge decides the logical argument based on the facts and support presented. Though, I've seen on television, of course, where the audience decides as well. Which makes me wonder if we are actually having "religious debates." Whose the cheering side and where are the rules (not universal) of that particle debate at hand?"
     
  16. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Windmills of your mind

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    29,482
    Ratings:
    +9,731
    Religion:
    Process of Spiritual Healing
    Oh. The devil's advocate. If the debate was specific to the argument and support, then it doesn't matter which "personal" side the person takes and whether he or she believes the argument, it just means is it sound and does it have credibility. I've played devil's advocate, but people mistake the argument as if each claim has to be the personal opinion of the person who makes it.
     
Loading...