How Good Are You Guys At Impromptu IRL In-Person Debating

Author: Public-Choice

Posts

Total: 23
Topic's author
#1
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
Have you all found that debating on this site has helped you all become better debaters outside of the website? 

Are you able to demolish all your friends in debates and stuff? Do they all assent to your superior skillz?

Or has this website not really transferred over into the real world?
#2
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 3,439
4
5
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
5
10
-->
@Public-Choice
I don't know,
Probably poor,
I suspect I,
Rely too much on external information, sources, rather than memorization of information in my brain,
Multiple rough drafts and organizations of thought, which I rely on typing out upon a computer, rather than laying out in my mind.
Might be a bit hesitant to disagree online, perhaps even moreso in person,
Though maybe it's that I dislike being wrong, so I hesitate to speak, rather than desire to not offend, maybe both.

I don't argue or debate with people, in person really,
So online debating ability would only partially transfer.

I suppose I could test my in person debating ability by using Discord,
But it's not a priority for me.
#3
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
I am pretty hard of hearing and so I'm always playing catch-up in most social settings and my brain is more devoted to observing the scene for context clues, etc.  In open discussion timing is an essential element of persuasive speech that I'm always missing.  I'm good at oration because of many years of speech therapy but that's quite different.

Topic's author
#4
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@oromagi
Were you born deaf?
#5
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Public-Choice
I got mumps and measles one right after the other when I was 5,  just a few months before the first school mandated vaccinations kicked in.  
#6
Novice_II
Novice_II's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 174
2
6
6
Novice_II's avatar
Novice_II
2
6
6
If you want to get better at in person debates, this site is useless.

Most of the people here don't even understand basic logic—yes I mean the bare basics of logic. The majority of people exaggerate about the sources they cite, and engage in bad faith. If you are someone who wants to be good at debating vocally or in person, do not use people on this site (with the exception of certain users like Bone and Ehyeh) as examples. 


#7
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,203
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@oromagi
how old are you 65+?
#8
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@sadolite
no I'm in my 50's 
#9
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@Public-Choice
I would say it's helped me practice my wording. Sometimes the same argument is more persuasive if worded differently. It's also helped me appreciate the need for background information, because I used to assume common knowledge of a niche subject would be closer to my own knowledge.
#10
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Public-Choice
Have you all found that debating on this site has helped you all become better debaters outside of the website? 

Are you able to demolish all your friends in debates and stuff? Do they all assent to your superior skillz?

Or has this website not really transferred over into the real world?
Hard to imagine, but I'm actually better in person than I am online. I've been debating since I was a small child, and if you knew my family, you'd understand the reason. My family, friends, and I have virtually debated everything of which we can think, and yes that would include some of my more controversial views like anarchism, Project MK Ultra, age of consent, Luciferianism, etc. Don't get me wrong, I respect the integrity this site intends to instill with its format, but there are members who neglect that the format is in no way a replacement for one capacity to reason. I cannot describe the extent of my vexation when I see arguments with high prospects reduce to "source battles." I'm not suggesting one should just accept one's talking out of one's ass, for lack of a better term, but sources should amplify an argument, not replace it. I like debating in person because there's no "talk to the source." It's my capacity to reason and apply logic vs yours.

If I can be a bit braggadocious, I'm like Samuel L. Jackson in that  '94 film, "Fresh." Think of any debater--and I do mean any debater--they may be more accomplished, and more renown, but "put the clock on them; put the show on speed, and I'll chew their ass up."
Topic's author
#11
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@Novice_II
The majority of people exaggerate about the sources they cite, and engage in bad faith.
Well I mean people in real life do that too, so wouldn't it be helpful being on here to see it in real life and combat it?

#12
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Public-Choice
Well I mean people in real life do that too, so wouldn't it be helpful being on here to see it in real life and combat it?
It's been my experience that many debaters do not read their own sources, let alone understand them. And one's more than capable of verifying sources in person. For example, I was once debating my cousin a few years ago over the matter of police shootings and the disparity among so-called races. He was under the impression that so-called "black" people would overwhelmingly fall victim to police shootings. I provided him a "source" which contradicted this impression. I expressed little resistance in providing him this source because I know my cousin--I know he'll read it in its entirety rather than just glimpse through it. Whether it's online or in person, eager debaters are eager debaters.
Topic's author
#13
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@Athias
I'm not suggesting one should just accept one's talking out of one's ass, for lack of a better term, but sources should amplify an argument, not replace it.
Well proof is half of the battle. Good sources are always better than shitty ones.

This is why primary sources are always the best. You can't just write off a primary source.

But I do agree with you that it is disgusting on here when two people are debating using Wikipedia and CNN for the crux of their proof. Like, yeah, that's a good source for information. Lol

#14
Avery
Avery's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 323
1
2
5
Avery's avatar
Avery
1
2
5
-->
@Public-Choice
Have you all found that debating on this site has helped you all become better debaters outside of the website? 
Absolutely. I've gone from having overly emotional, rigid opinions, to being more considering of other people's opinions. I now make a conscious effort to understand them first, rather than reacting with my own emotion.

Are you able to demolish all your friends in debates and stuff? Do they all assent to your superior skillz?
You shouldn't be arguing with people like that irl, particularly friends. To dissent from opinion is regarded as an offence, and doubly so if others have praised it first. It's much better to ask questions and listen, and judge only in your mind. With closer friends, I'll spend more time showing evidence and giving advice if I think they're dead wrong, but I'll back off once it's clear in their mind as to what they want.

If the other person isn't capable of making rational, logical arguments, then you should begin avoiding them, rather than declaring that they are not rational and/or logical. That will help avoid any retaliation or petty fights that are a waste of your time.

Or has this website not really transferred over into the real world?
I'm more aggressive and confrontational here than I am irl, although I've toned it down compared to how I was on DDO.

Although finding out the truth and testing ideas is wonderful, being argumentative is a negative and has consequences. 
#15
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Public-Choice
Well proof is half of the battle. Good sources are always better than shitty ones.
This is why primary sources are always the best. You can't just write off a primary source.
I wouldn't go that far. I'll illustrate:

"Needs" a source, excluding that both parties are privy to the same information:

The unemployment rate according to government metrics has hovered above 3% for the last 20 years.

"Doesn't need" a source:

The minimum wage creates unemployment.

There are certain subjects argued where understanding the subject is contingent on grasping the rationales, and applied logic, and others where information is submitted to create symmetry between both parties in discourse. When someone for example states, "provide me a source that the minimum-wage creates unemployment" this indicates to me, at least, that the person is seeking to engage appeals to authority--e.g. like asking for a source  for "F = Gm1m2/r2." It's tantamount to, "let me see someone else explain it." Don't get me wrong, sometimes that can be helpful as not everyone is good at providing explanations. But in my experience, it's just routine to those who overestimate "sources."

#16
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
Very poorly. I haven’t spoken fluent English outside myself for months.

#17
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,053
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I am bad at debates if I cant insult people who disagree with me. Insults help me a lot, but in real life they can lead to being beaten to death.
#18
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,203
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@oromagi
I am 58 and had to get measles, mumps polio vacs and all that to go to school.  Could be just right at that availability transition time I guess.
#19
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
I am excellent at it but I rarely have it. I learned to avoid the need to debate in most real-life conflicts and work around people who are very obstructing to obviously beneficial solutions by just literally arranging shit behind their back with other colleagues etc and not caring what they think (even if they are a boss, there's ways to work around them unless it's a very small and direct situation and order).

You see, I see it the other way around to Novice. I think real-life debating is the useless one as 9 times out of 10 you're against a moron who can't process basic logic as most humans are irrational and unaware of how behind they are. On here, you tend to be vs a much better average.

Mall and Type1 are actually fairly mediocre for real world debating, they at least make some semblance of sense most of the time, it's just weak how they link that to the debate's topic and resolution.

I also think a major factor is that in daily life, real-life debates are never really (after school ends) about a judge choosing who wins, it's about persuading masses listening or at times the opponent so it's a very different win condition.

On this website and in formal 1v1 debating, argumentation and case dismantling are huge factors, more than they should be for truth seeking. In real-life, persuading and working with the opponent's logic and turning against themselves matters far more.

So, in other words, real life debating is around 80% defense and persuasion, online and formal debating is 70% offense and argumentation.
#20
Elliott
Elliott's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 407
2
2
6
Elliott's avatar
Elliott
2
2
6
The beauty of debating online is that it gives you time to think up smart-ass answers.
Topic's author
#21
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
The beauty of debating online is that it gives you time to think up smart-ass answers.
Or time to think of answers in general.

Cicero said the most important part to being persuasive is to be as knowledgeable as possible on every topic imaginable. That way you can use it in debates at a moment's notice.
#22
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
I am the Cicero of this website in that case.

I disagree though, that's just data storage, the real skill is in utilisation.
Topic's author
#23
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
I disagree though, that's just data storage, the real skill is in utilisation.
Well his point was that having that data could be utilized to make a more persuasive case. Not just the having of the data but being able to wield it appropriately.