Has there ever been a debate thread where Dopers argued their pet political/social issues, but did so intentionally from the opposite position that they personally hold (e.g. gun control, abortion, capitalist markets, vaccines, etc.)? I understand this is a type of preparation some debaters use to hone their skills as it encourages debaters to carefully consider opposing viewpoints.
In the old days it would go into Great Debates, but in the past few years we have tightened up that forum quite a bit in order to improve the quality of the debates. I’m not sure if this fall afoul of the rules against insincere debating or not.
Let’s ask the GD mods if they want it in their forum. If not you can put it in IMHO.
This sounds like it could be fun, but, since the arguments being made would be insincere by definition, somewhat fraught with peril. And I would certainly hate to be quoted years later, out of context, as having previously endorsed some reprehensible position.
Sam Stone proposed this once, didn’t know it was already attempted.
Not my cuppa tea, but I can see why people would be interested. However, I don’t think I would be able to successfully convince someone that I was sincerely debating: my capacity for snark and asides will be my undoing.
I don’t have a problem with such a thread existing as long as it’s prominently labeled what is going on.
I would find it hard to participate in myself, because I think I would have to lie about actual facts to do it. My beliefs come from my understanding of the facts. And I’m not comfortable with lying. Or good at it.
I like the idea, but who would I be arguing against? This board leans left (me included), so if we all started swinging from the right for discussion purposes, who would be taking the left position? There are very few conservatives around here these days, and I am not sure we’d get any one of them to play along. Would it matter?
I was interested to see this. I have sometimes argued in favor of opinions that I don’t support. Usually just out of contrariness, but I explain to people that it is useful because it reminds me of just how worthless opinions are. Including my own.
I don’t feel like anyone has bothered to listen to me and the points I was making if they can’t make my arguments for me, in their own words. And I don’t see why anyone would keep wasting time trying to explain their viewpoint if I can’t show that I’ve followed along and that I understand it. So of course people should be able to argue a viewpoint that they don’t actually hold. That’s how you show that you understand it.