Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rex_Nex]

SADSKLAMDLASKDMSKADAS, ASDKLMASDKL!

I'll admit it now: I suck at arguing. Anyone who's gotten in an argument of any decent length will know this.

So, I come to you, Bay12! You seem like the folks to be in for a good debate now and then. I have two questions for you:

1. How can I seem like... well, less of a jerk? Usually an argument will start off like "Well, x is y because of z" followed by "No, x is not y, you aren't using z correctly.", and an hour later I'm getting stuff like "STOP TRYING IS SAY X IS Y, DUMBASS". I know I have to be a problem here: something about the way I type gets on people's nerves, apparently, because it happens to me so often. Does anyone have any advice on how sound less aggressive?

2. Does anyone have any tips for how to keep a debate/argument strong? They tend to split off into half a dozen little sub-arguments where I'm forced to defend little specifics, and I'm horrible at this. I'll trip up, the other guy will ignore everything except where I screwed something up, and suddenly my entire side of the argument is void. Any idea on how to keep things aligned?

[kaijyuu]

1. Well, my advice is to distance yourself from the arguments themselves. Look at them logically, and don't bring emotion into the picture unless it's already part of the debate. Remember, what you're actually fighting against is your opponent's arguments, not your opponent themself.

2. This is probably the desired end of a real debate, since to figure out where you're actually disagreeing, you generally have to dig into the minutia of each person's view. Some arguments require you to dig all the way down to axioms before you can actually resolve them. If your difference of opinion is easy to show, the debate isn't going to last very long.

Oh, and if people are nitpicking tiny irrelevant points to somehow disprove your entire argument, that's a form of ad hominem (specifically attempting to show you as a bad debater, and thus your argument is wrong). However, if those tiny points they're attacking are crucial to your overall argument, they could still be valid.



Finally you might want to just not get into internet debates at all Most are garbage, full of non sequitors and fallacies. Good mental exercise though if you're debating with another logical individual.

[Muz]

There are people who internet debate to learn something new, and there are people who debate to convince themselves that they are right. Avoid the latter and you've solved all your problems. I've learned to back away from a debate when one side starts appearing shrill and hugging a weak point; good internet debates will have people conceding to you when you're right, and building off your points to a mutually agreed conclusion.

[Ogdibus]

I've seen a couple other motives, too.  One is to persuade people that might be observing the argument, rather than the opposing participants.  The other is shaming.

Watch out for that second one.  It has to be handled, (defused) delicately.  It can be started unintentionally, too.  If it picks up other people, it can snowball.  Sometimes you have to cautiously stand your ground, and sometimes you have to get out.  It's rarely clear which is the best choice.

[Snowblind]

There are people who internet debate to learn something new, and there are people who debate to convince themselves that they are right. Avoid the latter and you've solved all your problems. I've learned to back away from a debate when one side starts appearing shrill and hugging a weak point; good internet debates will have people conceding to you when you're right, and building off your points to a mutually agreed conclusion.

Basically this. Especially the first sentence. Debate, especially on the internet is not likely to fundamentally change anybody' position. If you present a lot of strong points and they later resort to stupid ideological rhetoric and slogans and the sort, then you've won and it's time to quit posting, you won't accomplish anything.

[Muz]

I've seen a couple other motives, too.  One is to persuade people that might be observing the argument, rather than the opposing participants.  The other is shaming.

Watch out for that second one.  It has to be handled, (defused) delicately.  It can be started unintentionally, too.  If it picks up other people, it can snowball.  Sometimes you have to cautiously stand your ground, and sometimes you have to get out.  It's rarely clear which is the best choice.

Those other motives are emergent from pride as well. And go the same direction.

Well, I guess there's a third motive, like people who are being defensive or correcting something they believe is blatantly false. Something along the lines of..
"Hey guys, DF should have graphics!"
"..No, I didn't search before posting. I'm sorry. But you know DF is a good game and does look better with graphics. Net hack looks better with graphics "
"..but how do I get a tileset.."
"..Nobody gave me links to the wiki. It's not linked on the fucking main page you shitbag."
"I don't even play WoW. Stop putting words in my mouth. WoW isn't even a bad game. If people were like you guys we would all be playing Nethack!"
"If you're going to fucking defend it all the time at least get your facts straight instead of repeating what everyone says. It's UTF-8, not ASCII. Dumb sheeple like yourself is why the holocaust happened."

Sometimes people get into a tantrum spiral where they refute weak points with more weak points, and combined with a bad mood, the points just keep getting weaker as they go on. Learn to spot this and exit.

[ISP]

Just look at their text, then start laughing... why? Its because argueing on the internet is like running in the special olympics, you dont really win, you just show off the fact your special and make normal people pitty you.

Also there are the people that do it just because they are mean.

Want to set someone straight, use facts, want to get upset about how they rebuttle, go watch mlp:fim and pet your screen ponies.

[Zangi]

Want to set someone straight, use facts, want to get upset about how they rebuttle, go watch mlp:fim and pet your screen ponies.

I shall have you know... being upset over the special olympics is not exclusive to people who watch mlp:fim.  It is equal opportunity among all demographics...

[pisskop]

SADSKLAMDLASKDMSKADAS, ASDKLMASDKL!

I'll admit it now: I suck at arguing. Anyone who's gotten in an argument of any decent length will know this.

So, I come to you, Bay12! You seem like the folks to be in for a good debate now and then. I have two questions for you:

1. How can I seem like... well, less of a jerk? Usually an argument will start off like "Well, x is y because of z" followed by "No, x is not y, you aren't using z correctly.", and an hour later I'm getting stuff like "STOP TRYING IS SAY X IS Y, DUMBASS". I know I have to be a problem here: something about the way I type gets on people's nerves, apparently, because it happens to me so often. Does anyone have any advice on how sound less aggressive?

2. Does anyone have any tips for how to keep a debate/argument strong? They tend to split off into half a dozen little sub-arguments where I'm forced to defend little specifics, and I'm horrible at this. I'll trip up, the other guy will ignore everything except where I screwed something up, and suddenly my entire side of the argument is void. Any idea on how to keep things aligned?

Not having read what others said due to time crunch (and I apologize but I am brain-farting so I came here to 'relax') I say my instincts:

Spoiler: 1) (click to show/hide)

  -  Don't blame others, or imply explicitly that the other person is bad or wrong.  Their idea sucks, not the rest of them or even their other ideas.
   -  Try to be logical and impartial.
  - Don't try to hide flaws in your own ideas
   - Read every response. (sorry)
  - Understand different culutres and subcultures result in differing attitudes and try to stay away from criticizing cultures if they are not the issue.
  - read what you are about to post out loud or at least mentally before you do so.
  - try to use correct grammer and punctuation.  You are more likely to be taken seriously if you say "I believe this is wrong because..." than if you say "For cereal?  LoLz cuz i herd uz got..."  I frequently edit my posts because I feel I improperly expressed myself...

Spoiler: 2) (click to show/hide)

  -Logic.
  - backgorund research helps, and while prior knowledge is my perferred method of smiting foes, taking 5-10 minutes to research is a huge improvement over doing nothing.
  - Find supporters
  - Remember that in the end everybody is mob ruled, and ever biased.  This forum is somewhat liberal in it bias, and as something of an authoritarian I have to accept that my ideas may not always be popular, for example.
  - If you cannot command gt respect from your opponent than the debate is not going to progress.  End it.  WGAS if you 'lost' an arguement that devolved into pedantic squabbling? "who is the bigger fool, an ignorant man or he who argues with him"?
  - Try to learn something wheever you argue.  Whether you strengthen you opinion, learn the opposition's position better, or find flaws within your arguement, learn something.

[Ogdibus]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I've seen a couple other motives, too.  One is to persuade people that might be observing the argument, rather than the opposing participants.  The other is shaming.

Watch out for that second one.  It has to be handled, (defused) delicately.  It can be started unintentionally, too.  If it picks up other people, it can snowball.  Sometimes you have to cautiously stand your ground, and sometimes you have to get out.  It's rarely clear which is the best choice.

Those other motives are emergent from pride as well. And go the same direction.

Well, I guess there's a third motive, like people who are being defensive or correcting something they believe is blatantly false. Something along the lines of..
"Hey guys, DF should have graphics!"
"..No, I didn't search before posting. I'm sorry. But you know DF is a good game and does look better with graphics. Net hack looks better with graphics "
"..but how do I get a tileset.."
"..Nobody gave me links to the wiki. It's not linked on the fucking main page you shitbag."
"I don't even play WoW. Stop putting words in my mouth. WoW isn't even a bad game. If people were like you guys we would all be playing Nethack!"
"If you're going to fucking defend it all the time at least get your facts straight instead of repeating what everyone says. It's UTF-8, not ASCII. Dumb sheeple like yourself is why the holocaust happened."

Sometimes people get into a tantrum spiral where they refute weak points with more weak points, and combined with a bad mood, the points just keep getting weaker as they go on. Learn to spot this and exit.

They can be emergent from pride, but they are not invariably emergent from pride.  I probably should have used the word "approach" rather than motive, because it includes the ideas of both motive and strategy.  It's important to be attentive to both.

[miauw62]

Want to set someone straight, use facts, want to get upset about how they rebuttle, go watch mlp:fim and pet your screen ponies.

Completely unneeded insult is completely unneeded.

[kaijyuu]

Why would I need to pet a pony on the screen? I've got a plushie for that.

[pisskop]

Spoiler: off topic (click to show/hide)

So, ummm, well... What about ponies is so enticing?  I've never quite gotten the pony thing.  And why ponies?  Why not ah, someone like strawberry shortcake?

[kaijyuu]

Like any media franchise, it has a fanbase because people like it. You can watch the cartoon if you like, but understand it's not for everyone.

And I've seen the recent strawberry shortcake tv series. It sucks. Except the music; that's actually quite good.

[Caz]

Arguing on any topic should be an exercise in controlled folly. You don't convince anyone using words. "Speak softly and carry a big stick."