Debating always was, is and will be a defunct thing to be brilliant at.

Can you show me somebody in real life who loves debating that isn't a toxic person in a fair few ways?

I was no exception to this rule. I probably still am not, I'm working on it.

I think debating is a natural interest and hobby of someone who is very prone to habitually disagree and nitpick at things. I was that guy for a fair amount of my life. I changed how readily I showed it IRL but never changed the core personality and it was only recently that I appreciated how much effort I put into arguing when otherwise agreeing and even faking a polite white-lie-support of something could just so much easier handle the scenario.

If we go through life nonstop arguing it gets addictive, not just because we are good at it but because we feel 'real' amongst a buch of 'fakes'. The problem is that this makes us enemies, nobody likes a skilled debater in real life.  Can you imagine Oromagi, Ragnar and Ramshutu or MisterChris or whoever just arguing the crap out of everyone in their workplace that disagreed with them? Nobody would end up liking them... That's the issue with it.

I have spent so much of my life loving to argue and finally now I realise I basically convinced 0 people of anything...  Okay maybe 2 or 3 but come on, that's at the sake of alienating far more.

What good is it to debate? I even do it with etiquette and that just makes more enemies as then I seem fake about it. I've never once seen positive outcome from a real life application of my debating skills, like literally never. It's only helped me when another similar to me tries to take me on in that way and how rare is that? Like... twice a year someone maybe really, really wants a debate on something with me but that's about it. We live in a world that's still ruled by jungle law, we're just primates wearing suits and ties to hide the reality of it. If you piss off the wrong alpha, it doesn't matter how logical you are, you'll get alienated in that place. That's life and it's irrational, unfair and shit but what I have come to realise and truly appreciate is that what's even more shit than that would be a world where we all argued 24/7... nothing would get done.

I'm starting to wonder if I was wrong about everything, like ever taking part in a community like this and ever liking to argue. It's caused me more issues than I'd like to admit, In hindsight I do believe lost a few real long-term friendships predominantly due to this habit and craving of mine to argue and debate.

I've just learned to shut my mouth when I disagree and think hard of the impact of my disagreement before opening it (my mouth) but that doesn't really settle the unrest in me at the stupidity of what's unfurling in the (to me) childlike disagreement between grown adults that should have a higher capacity to reason than what they convey.

Is that what life is like for you other skilled debaters? I really dislike it but I accept it.

Yes,  and RM- of all the writings I've ever read of yours, this is my favorite.  Well said.

@RatMan

What is a toxic person?

And convincing people that are already convinced/conditioned, is extremely difficult.

Though changing peoples minds isn't the purpose of debate.

Debating is a competition of intellects.

The forum is the place to promote ideas.

Debating is just a practice of logical structures, philosophies as well as normal knowledge.

Debating is a art of skeptics, and it gives you critical thinking.

Though we can’t say that we are better at making friends than others, we could say that we are better at questioning things than others.

But there is another question: does it matter?

Very well put. Personally, I see the value of debating, especially in person, as being able to put logic behind claims. In debate club or debate tournaments, you're just given a topic and a side on that topic that you might not agree with and you're forced to rationalize your position. It's too easy to make claims without thinking or not be able to properly justify our claims, and I think that the value I got out of debating was in pushing myself to justify my claims and rationalize my thoughts to other people. It was mostly not for the sake of being 'right', though I'd be lying if I said it wasn't to some degree, but it was largely about trying to make a case that's logically better than my opponents even if I absolutely disagree with the case itself.

Debating is the only real reason I ever stopped to question and justify the things I think. Beyond that, excluding aspiring lawyers, it's just a hobby at best. One that can become very toxic for sure. I forget who said it, but the point of a debate isn't to convince the people you're debating against as much as it is to plant a seed of doubt in everyone who is listening in the hopes that the arguments you presented will convince them.

Socrates, duh.

I don't know what anyone's definition of "toxic" is(In fact, the definition is technically infinitely versatile), but from the agreed definition[1], if you are being toxic, you aren't being a good debater. If you are reasoning respectfully and people think you are toxic, that is their fault for being incorrect and intolerant.

I can't think of any sane person who would become "toxic" in any of these cases. The closest match of being real for a human being is (3), and even then, he would be banned in a few days(if not hours) if he is exhibiting such behavior here.

I just got a job in sales. The skills seem applicable to that. Since I am channeling my energy at work usually reserved for debates, I've lost interest and will likely just drop all the debates I am in. 

It's a job that absolutely drains most people sk the drop out rate is high, but I am thriving and this is the most fun I had at work in years.

See if you can find a boiler room to work in or something.  You might like it and find some real world applications for your skills.

Usually they advertise as telemarketing jobs. Sometimes as sales jobs. 

Well Islam is what brought me to debating in the first place though i might not be very good at it yet but I enjoy engaging with people of different views for a spectrum of reasons; not necessarily involving a religion or so. My point is that your perception of debating to escape a religion or not debating because of religion doesn't quite make sense. Over-generalizing much!?

I believe it's been quite a while since we've talked. I don't think it's been days, but months. Just want to point that out.

That said,  your religion's record dealing with cases concerning apostasy doesn't bother you in the slightest? And of the blesphemy laws surrounding Pakistan? And of the selective bias towards palestinians to the detriment of rohingya, uyger? 

Sure, I'll admit that it's not the religion doing the talking but Saudi Arabia's perversion of it. As far as I know, Bangladesh (in most parts??) and Indonesia (only in some small parts) remain key figures in moderate islam. But im still correct in suggesting  that the punishment for apostasy is still death. Further, complete submission suggests exactly what it suggests: total surrender to a diety. I think it's silly to have everyone conform to such a hideous rule in which you're supposed to worship God as he was meant to be worship (through total submission). Additionally, I think it's also silly to classify non-islamic literature (i.e. Hellenistic philosophy, Malebranche's Occasionalism, Humean Necessary Connection) with derogatory classifications. I read them for quite a while and found them superior than reading the muslim scholars' general rulings. Muslims can't seem to grasp the simple fact that a sizeable minority might choose to be different and that some of them might prefer reading non-islamic literature for a living. Instead, muslims classify them as misled believers which is highly offensive. I am not ignorant; I choose not to subscribe to your religion. I'm fully aware of my decision and it was a fully informed decision. 

For the record, I'm not giving the dhimmis a pass either. They've been antagonizing Muslims for a christian prosecution complex they've been fetishizing and they take every chance to mention it in mass.

Friends are not important, you only think they are when you're young. The fastest way to lose me as a friend these days is to expect anything from me. I have one good buddy these days, from way back, recently back from Canada, and when he lands on it's with some once in a lifetime shit, or we go on a 3 week bender after a funeral, or some shit like that. He's got his shit, I've got mine. The rest is work social, sports social, girls, and family.

Gym tune lol. 

  I don't think I'm toxic. I've calmed down a LOT since I first found my passion for debate. I used to be toxic. I used to throw insults into my arguments for the flare and such. I still feel that strong impulse when someone is rude in a debate to be equally or more rude back, but I can restrain myself now.

  I can totally relate to my overcombativeness pushing people away. Especially at my job. Everyone there is super conservative, and while I enjoy a spirited discussion, people's passions flare too intensely to have a real conversation most of the time about politics and religion, so I bite my tongue, pick my battles, and try to think my arguments all the way through instead of just throwing myself into the fray and winging it.

@Topic

Debating, is just being able to find information, logic, and argue charismatically.

Which is useful in life, as 'many jobs in situations require use of 'finding, logic, and convincing other people.

A person doesn't 'need to be toxic, to be a fine debater.

If one is positive, constructive with others, they need not make enemies, and instead, can find a number of friendly acquaintances.

@badger

Bad friends are a danger and a drain,

Average friends are a bother, an entertainment, occasionally a help.

Good friends are a boon, lifesaver, and entertainment.

Though I don't go looking for friends, myself.

A true 100% trustworthy friendship is a very rare thing indeed.

I would suggest that generally we make good acquaintances.

My wife and daughters are my best friends and the only people that I trust implicitly.

...."Truth is one of the central subjects in philosophy. It is also one of the largest. Truth has been a topic of discussion in its own right for thousands of years. Moreover, a huge variety of issues in philosophy relate to truth, either by relying on theses about truth, or implying theses about truth."....

And when we are offering speculative ideas of what is true, we have only rational,  logical common sense ---many times based on seemingly known facts and truths---   to base our speculative truths on.

Ex do masks make a differrence with viri?  Talking to some with evidence and rational, logical common sense is almost a religious type debate. We know that  a virus that is very small enough to get through the openings in fabric of masks, that allow  in much larger molecules of air, yet, some viri ---not all--  will get stopped by the mask fabric ergo a reduction in the amount ingested vs if we were to wear no mask at all.

Masks are effective in reducing the amount of viri ingested into our bodies and subsequently --- and generally speaking---  lessen the detrimental adverse effects of the viri.

Similar thing can be said of some cancers in our bodies i.e. that most if not all humans have some cancer cells in their bodies but they are kept in check by our immune system ergo their proliferation is held in check, for the most part.  Ex most over some age group of prostate cancer cells, yet, most often, most men will die before the prostate cancers proliferate enough to kill them before other issues.

What is toxic is those who refuse to acknowledge evidence and any subsequent, rational, logical common sense derived from what is known truths and facts.

This is why religion is such a toxic subject as is politics. And now masks and virus management.

Also what is toxic is the amount of repeating the same info/ideas, that goes on between two opposing viewpoints.