I’ve just started reading some of the GD threads and I’m puzzled by the perpetuation of some debates (especially those about religion) that appear to me to be futile (or more precisely, ineffective at changing anyone’s thinking about the main issue).
Although many of the posts are intelligent, articulate and well-reasoned, I’m wondering whether they are meant to teach and enlighten or are they mainly debating exercises, rhetorical acrobatics, philosophical sparring practice? Is the intent to actually change someone’s viewpoint or is to win points? I’m genuinely curious.
In other words, are the debates primarily benign pastimes (many of which are entertaining) or do they serve some other purpose?
BTW, I just realized that, in composing this post, I’ve mentioned debates and posts but I’ve avoided acknowledging the presence of any other people on this message board. Not sure what term to use. Are we all members, or users, or posters? When we start a thread are we im-posters, and when we leave a debate, do we do it ex post? When we can’t stomach some posters’ tirades, do we label them ab-users? And is the message board the message?
(That about does it for the facile puns.)
Seriously, we do it because it amuses us. Also, we can’t believe that people could be so dumb as to not see things we know are obviously true, so we expend tremendous effort in trying to open their eyes.
It really gets interesting when two people on opposite sides both take this position…
I often debate with myself internally; trouble with this is that my limited perspective can lead me to wildly incorrect conclusions; part of the point of debating with others (for me, anyway) is to broaden my view of a given topic; Often, I’m not terribly interested in ‘winning’ (although I may still have to present ‘arguments’ in order to provoke response and thus to address positions that perhaps I only wekly hold).
There are a number of reasons for debating. (In addition to the sheer intellectual pleasure of it, of course.) Even if those who are actually participating in the debate may be too set in their positions to change, other people who are more on the fence may be reading the debate and may be swayed towards one side or the other. By debating, we come to understand our own positions better, and even if it’s unlikely this will lead to any radical changes, we may develop more complex or nuanced views. Finally, by debating we may come to better understand the positions of those who disagree with us, and even if neither debater changes his or her mind, this understanding can build mutual respect between people who disagree but who are nontheless fellow citizens (or fellow citizens of the world), as well as more understanding and respect for those who are/are not religious/liberal/advocates of gun rights/etc.
Realistically, for some of us a certain amount of sheer stubborn partisan competitiveness of the “Well, I can’t let that assertion simply go unchallenged” sort may also factor in to it.
i think you will get multiple motives for each individual and MEBuckner said it quite well.
on the subject of economics i am actually trying to influence peoples thinking and have gotten evidence i occasionally succeed. had 2 people request to publish my essay. i also learn things from people who refute me. i didn’t know that there was a natural fission reactor 2 billion years ago. and sometimes just reading posts is interesting and educational. there are definitely people hear more intelligent than the talking airheads blowing smoke on the boob tube.
I know that I’ve altered my own views slightly over the years I’ve been here. Back when I first registered, I was rabidly against any gun control, wishy-washy about abortion, unsure about racial issues, less knowledgeable about certain science-related subjects, and EXTREMELY self-absorbed about my own personal opinions. 2 1/2 years and hundreds of debates later, I’d like to think that my own views have solidified a bit, that I’ve picked up some healthy doses of information, and am more sure of myself about many subjects.
I think others have come pretty close to laying out my reasons to debate. Im constantly coming accross things that interest me, in the media and life in general. I have become aware that I am unable to see all sides of a concept or opinion on my own and therefore look to discuss/ debate these things with others in the hope that they will introduce new viewpoints to me so that i may form a more objective opinion of my own.
remembers to breath
At the same time I see debate as a necessary way of enlightening people who have been misinformed on subjects i can offer experience or advice in.
Welcome to the message board, cognoscente. No doubt each of us has his or her own reasons for debating. I enjoy it as an intellectual challenge. Also, I learn a great deal from other posters (also called “Dopers” BTW) Also, the resistance of those who disagree with me goads me to think more carefully and to do more research. I think the result of a debate is a deeper, more accurate understanding for all participants and lurkers.
I would like to think that my expressed views help convince readers of this board, but I have not seen much evidence of that.
The reasons for that have been explained to you in great detail and with great repetition by many people, but without apparent effect.
I’ll echo {B}MEBuckner** to the extent I can - this is about increasing my own understanding of the world I live in. Others help me, and I try to help them. I’ve learned a few things, changed my views about some issues, and I hope others have learned from me. This is certainly not intellectual masturbation for most of us here, although it may be for some - the fight against ignorance includes one’s own ignorance, too, and it’s always wise to keep that possibility in mind.
Many times, the best effect that you can hope for with a debate is to convince others that you’re not crazy for believing as you do. Seems like a good enough reason to me.
There was a thread recently about the Prodical Son. I did some research and actually came to change my opinion concerning what the story meant. I don’t think it had much of an effect on anyone else, but it helped me. That would not have happened without the interaction of the debate.
So, for some of you, the debating journey is as important as the destination.
Also, I’m surprised that nobody came up with this explanation: Sometimes I argue vehemently about something because I’m not really convinced about it myself. After all, does it really matter if someone disagrees with my viewpoint?
