1 line
10 KiB
JavaScript
1 line
10 KiB
JavaScript
import{d as o}from"./chunks/git.data.BcrWSzMU.js";import{M as i,q as n,Q as e,K as r,u as t,ag as s,p as l}from"./chunks/framework.Sr2_9k8k.js";const h=e("h1",{class:"p-name"},"Debate",-1),d=["innerHTML"],u=s('<hr><details><summary>Referenced by:</summary><a href="/garden/no-politics-rules/index.md">"No Politics" Rules</a></details><p>Debate takes many forms, but for this article we're going to group them into three categories, and argue why none of them work towards actually finding the best solution to a problem. These categories are going to be structured debates, public debates, and conversational debates.</p><h2 id="structured-debates" tabindex="-1">Structured debates <a class="header-anchor" href="#structured-debates" aria-label="Permalink to "Structured debates""></a></h2><p>These are the formal debates held in academic contexts and tournaments. These have predefined formats like Lincoln-Douglas or Oxford style, and have the explicit goal of one of the individuals being judged as the winner not based on having the correct stance or even making good arguments, but for their performance in the debate, dictated by their charisma and rhetoric and ability to respond quickly.</p><p>While specific formats vary, many of these debates are filled with <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5133664/user-clip-gish-gallop-explained-mehdi-hasan" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">gish galloping</a> and other rhetorical flourishes. Gish galloping is when a debater speeds through many arguments with the goal of overwhelming the adversary, as its easier and faster to make unsubstantiated claims than it is to contest them. This is a common technique not just in structured debates but all debates. If you're ever watched Ben Shapiro debate (and you have my sympathies), you've seen the gish gallop technique in action.</p><p>These debates are adversarial by design, and there is no opportunity for constructive discussion aimed at arriving at the correct conclusion. The people participating in these debates certainly prepare greatly for arguing their positions, but additionally learn a great many skills and techniques unique to the formal debate format.</p><p>It should likely go without saying, but this is clearly not meant to be how new ideas are formed or how solutions get created. This is an academic exercise completely divorced from actually solving the problems in our society. The debates are not intended to influence people or impact policy. The skills developed here do not translate to collaborative problem-solving environments.</p><h2 id="public-debates" tabindex="-1">Public debates <a class="header-anchor" href="#public-debates" aria-label="Permalink to "Public debates""></a></h2><p>Public debates are debates held by public figures, such as the presidential debates or debates involving political pundits like Ben Shapiro or Cenk Uyghur. They don't have judges or formal winners and losers. Similar to structured debates, these are adversarial debates that don't aim to form a consensus by the end of the debate. Instead, the goal here is for each debater to improve public sentiment towards themselves.</p><p>Gish galloping and its companion <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FK4RHzNHZXY" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">reverse gish galloping</a>, whereby a flaw in one specific point is used to dismiss the entire argument, are commonly used here, alongside ad hominem attacks and other fallacies. Since the goal is to change public perception, appeals to emotion work greatly here.</p><p>As before, these are not intended to change the minds of either participant. They may influence the audience to view a participant or their position more favorably, but this isn't some victory for the "free market of ideas" - the influence is still tied more to the participants' charisma and rhetorical skill rather than the correctness of their position. Several on the left have argued against the utility of these debates, debate culture, and "debate bro" influencers, such as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud1ANAF9pW8" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Wisecrack</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z3MqJakNbI" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Noah Samsen</a>.</p><h2 id="conversational-debates" tabindex="-1">Conversational debates <a class="header-anchor" href="#conversational-debates" aria-label="Permalink to "Conversational debates""></a></h2><p>This refers to impromptu political discourse, and typically happens between non-influencers on social media. Its debate for the rest of us! Since this is inherently informal there's no enforced structure, but typically they're adversarial since the conversation starts by someone taking issue with something someone else said.</p><p>As with the other types, being adversarial means closing one's mind and framing the debate as a competition with a winner and a loser rather than a constructive conversation building towards consensus. One's ego gets intertwined with being correct, and conceding points becomes akin to admitting personal failures.</p><p>Being conversational, participants can come and go and anyone can try initiating arguments. This gives rise to <a href="https://wondermark.com/c/1062/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">sealioning</a>, a form of bad faith debater that exhausts others with their continuous requests for citations or other responses under the pretense of civility. While they can be grating on anyone, their especially a problem for influencers or those who "go viral". The issue is the sheer amount of criticism, the mental and emotional drain filtering through it can be, and the nebulousness of what even is "valid criticism". Innuendo Studios discussed this concept in <a href="https://youtu.be/BFSe5-i1LoU" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Why Don't You Respond to Criticism?</a>.</p><h2 id="alternatives-to-debate" tabindex="-1">Alternatives to debate <a class="header-anchor" href="#alternatives-to-debate" aria-label="Permalink to "Alternatives to debate""></a></h2><h3 id="improving-your-understanding" tabindex="-1">Improving your understanding <a class="header-anchor" href="#improving-your-understanding" aria-label="Permalink to "Improving your understanding""></a></h3><p>If you want to better understand these issues and have an open mind, then read a book. Those who you would be arguing against will not have as good an understanding of political theory as books written by the experts. It won't give you the pleasure of having "beaten someone in the free market of ideas", but it's the best way for you to actually understand the underlying philosophies that compose different political ideologies. Ask me if you'd like any recommendations for getting into <a href="/garden/leftism/">Leftist</a> thought 🙂.</p><p>In general, become skeptical of political discourse you see in the media, mainstream or social or otherwise. Keep in mind these are people trying to "win" and change minds, and are likely not delving into underlying theory. Clips of gotcha moments or isolated "good points" may feel good to share, but they are unlikely to change minds.</p><h3 id="improving-others-understanding" tabindex="-1">Improving others' understanding <a class="header-anchor" href="#improving-others-understanding" aria-label="Permalink to "Improving others' understanding""></a></h3><p>If you want to convince others to shift their political stance, then recommending books for them to read is also probably your best bet. You can assist someone on their political journey, but you can't force them onto it. If you fancy yourself skilled at distilling information and already have a very good understanding of not just the position you're arguing but the underlying theory, then by all means you can write your own "explainers" on the topic and distribute those as well. May I propose a <a href="/garden/digital-gardens/">Digital Garden</a>?</p><h3 id="being-productive" tabindex="-1">Being productive <a class="header-anchor" href="#being-productive" aria-label="Permalink to "Being productive""></a></h3><p>Rather than having political discourse for its own sake, apply the topic to something that can be acted upon, such as changing a rule within the community (might I suggest discussing a replacement or set of replacement rules to get rid of an existing <a href="/garden/no-politics-rules/">"No Politics" Rule</a> 😉). These are much more likely to work constructively towards finding consensus, and can actually lead to productive changes that affect the participants. You'll see issues raised and be able to find ways to solve them amicably rather than trying to dismiss them. Naturally this only applies in certain contexts and discussing current events won't often be translatable to the community directly.</p><p>Also, don't neglect your physical community. All of this article has been centering on online conversations, but if your goal is to be productive and make meaningful change, then go out and do something! Join a local org - I recommend checking out <a href="https://www.mutualaidhub.org/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Mutual Aid Hub</a>, but a local political org can also help with mobilizing for protests and other events, which supports the cause far more than arguing with strangers on the internet. The specific org doesn't matter too much - one's political journey will likely involve multiple orgs - but meeting up with comrades offline at all will provide useful and fulfilling experiences. There's a list of leftist organizations <a href="https://abolitionnotes.org/leftist-organizations" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">here</a> to help you in your search; it has a lot of other useful resources as well.</p>',25),y=JSON.parse('{"title":"Debate","description":"","frontmatter":{"alias":"Debating","public":"true","slug":"debate","title":"Debate","prev":false,"next":false},"headers":[],"relativePath":"garden/debate/index.md","filePath":"garden/debate/index.md"}'),c={name:"garden/debate/index.md"},v=Object.assign(c,{setup(p){const a=i();return(g,m)=>(l(),n("div",null,[h,e("p",null,[r("986 words, ~5 minute read. "),e("span",{innerHTML:t(o)[`site/${t(a).page.value.relativePath}`]},null,8,d)]),u]))}});export{y as __pageData,v as default};
|