How to debate online
Posted Jan2-10 at 04:21 AM by sylas
As a gift to the online community I reveal at last Sylas' rules for online debate. These rules don't apply for social engagement or cases where there is mutual recognition that one side has more expertise and the other is asking questions. This is for debate where each side is confident that the other side is incorrect.
Rule 1. Aim to communicate, not to "win".
Putting this rule in the negative form, never ever start an internet debate with the aim of changing someone else's mind. This is setting up the debate for failure; because you won't achieve that aim.
You can't change someone else's mind: it belongs to them. If they change, it will be in their own good time, and through their own thinking on the matter. None of us change our minds quickly and easily; if we have strongly held views then we have reasons for that, and it will nearly always take time to rethink them. When someone's view does change, it is usually not during the heat of a debate, but later, as they reflect privately. But in any case, anyone who changes their mind on something deserves to have the credit for changing their own mind.
What you can do is communicate. You can present your own insights or information in a way that is accessible to readers; both the person you are debating and others who may be looking on. Make this your aim. Consider debate a "win" when you have been understood; not when everyone agrees with you.
Note that with this rule, debate is no longer a zero-sum game. In an ideal debate, both sides win; because each side has been able to present their thoughts so that others can understand them. Taking this to the ultimate the master debater aims for communication both ways... to be understood and to understand; to leave the debate understanding better the opposite view. There's no implication in this that you have to appreciate it better. You may even have a much clearer idea of where the other side is going wrong. But you want to give it a fair hearing.
The objective is simply to get a better understanding, and allow others a better understanding of your position as well.
Rule 2. Respect the person but not the idea.
There's a world of difference between saying someone is an idiot, and saying that a certain idea is idiotic. Some notions really are absurd and deserve no respect at all. But a person who happens to hold that idea still deserves respect; there is more to the person than this.
Never tell someone they are an idiot. (It defeats your aims: see rule 1.) The only reason for showing any mercy to a dumb idea is a matter of strategy, which brings us to...
Rule 3. Show why, not tell what.
It is far more effective to show that a proposition is foolish than to say it is foolish. Sometimes you might want to summarize a bit in robust terms (balance that with consideration of rule 1.) What counts is if you can communicate clearly the reasons why a proposition is foolish. The ultimate win is when you can simply leave readers to draw the obvious conclusions for themselves, without spelling it out.
It often helps to be a bit restrained. Rather than say something is foolish, just say it is incorrect and point out why.
Rule 4. Acknowledge your own mistakes.
For debaters who never make mistakes, you may skip this rule. But for the rest of us, I consider this crucial. Sometimes, dear readers, it turns out that the person you are debating makes a point which is valid, and on reflection you have to agree.
If you have mastered the Zen of debate, this is a win. (See rule 1.) This is one of the most useful things that can happen; it lets you change your own mind and improve it. What could be better? It may be a minor point, or it may be something new to you that you need to think about some more privately, or (unusual, but it happens) it may leave your whole previous view in tattered ruins.
Always acknowledge this with thanks.
Codicil
People, this is online. Your potential audience is world wide, and your gems of wisdom are being scavenged by roving spiders of major search engines. So take a little bit of time to write well. Consider your grammar, spelling and layout. Writing a post offline can help, and always preview. Keep it concise. (I have a problem with this last point; I know. But even if there's a lot to say, you can usually prune it down to give a high ratio of content to verbiage.)
Rule 1. Aim to communicate, not to "win".
Putting this rule in the negative form, never ever start an internet debate with the aim of changing someone else's mind. This is setting up the debate for failure; because you won't achieve that aim.
You can't change someone else's mind: it belongs to them. If they change, it will be in their own good time, and through their own thinking on the matter. None of us change our minds quickly and easily; if we have strongly held views then we have reasons for that, and it will nearly always take time to rethink them. When someone's view does change, it is usually not during the heat of a debate, but later, as they reflect privately. But in any case, anyone who changes their mind on something deserves to have the credit for changing their own mind.
What you can do is communicate. You can present your own insights or information in a way that is accessible to readers; both the person you are debating and others who may be looking on. Make this your aim. Consider debate a "win" when you have been understood; not when everyone agrees with you.
Note that with this rule, debate is no longer a zero-sum game. In an ideal debate, both sides win; because each side has been able to present their thoughts so that others can understand them. Taking this to the ultimate the master debater aims for communication both ways... to be understood and to understand; to leave the debate understanding better the opposite view. There's no implication in this that you have to appreciate it better. You may even have a much clearer idea of where the other side is going wrong. But you want to give it a fair hearing.
The objective is simply to get a better understanding, and allow others a better understanding of your position as well.
Rule 2. Respect the person but not the idea.
There's a world of difference between saying someone is an idiot, and saying that a certain idea is idiotic. Some notions really are absurd and deserve no respect at all. But a person who happens to hold that idea still deserves respect; there is more to the person than this.
Never tell someone they are an idiot. (It defeats your aims: see rule 1.) The only reason for showing any mercy to a dumb idea is a matter of strategy, which brings us to...
Rule 3. Show why, not tell what.
It is far more effective to show that a proposition is foolish than to say it is foolish. Sometimes you might want to summarize a bit in robust terms (balance that with consideration of rule 1.) What counts is if you can communicate clearly the reasons why a proposition is foolish. The ultimate win is when you can simply leave readers to draw the obvious conclusions for themselves, without spelling it out.
It often helps to be a bit restrained. Rather than say something is foolish, just say it is incorrect and point out why.
Rule 4. Acknowledge your own mistakes.
For debaters who never make mistakes, you may skip this rule. But for the rest of us, I consider this crucial. Sometimes, dear readers, it turns out that the person you are debating makes a point which is valid, and on reflection you have to agree.
If you have mastered the Zen of debate, this is a win. (See rule 1.) This is one of the most useful things that can happen; it lets you change your own mind and improve it. What could be better? It may be a minor point, or it may be something new to you that you need to think about some more privately, or (unusual, but it happens) it may leave your whole previous view in tattered ruins.
Always acknowledge this with thanks.
Codicil
People, this is online. Your potential audience is world wide, and your gems of wisdom are being scavenged by roving spiders of major search engines. So take a little bit of time to write well. Consider your grammar, spelling and layout. Writing a post offline can help, and always preview. Keep it concise. (I have a problem with this last point; I know. But even if there's a lot to say, you can usually prune it down to give a high ratio of content to verbiage.)
Total Comments 0
