Frogboy Frogboy

Debates and skinning

▼

Debates and skinning

from WinCustomize Forums
I'm curious as to how people in this community feel about debating. Some people I know simply don't like to get into disagreements or "constructive arguments" (aka debates). Other people (like myself) love to debate (as you've no doubt seen over the years).

In my off hours, I'll visit political, history, and technology sites purely to debate with other people who also like to debate. It's a great way to sharpen the mind's thought process and think through an idea or an opinion because you get in the habit of having to look at an issue from multiple sides which can save you grief later on.

Because I visit so many different "communities" (I'm very active in the game developer community for instance as well as several political discussion communities) it's easy to see general differences in how people act and feel and argue when they feel passionate about something.

It seems to me that most people in the skinning community are generally not into debating. Which is of course not bad at all. The only downside I've seen is the number of people who want to make assertions based on emotion or "gut feeling" but are disclined to have to back up that assertion with evidence or reasoning. It usually comes back to either "Well that's just how I feel" or it'll turn into a flame war.

I think sometimes one of the reasons why some people will see my posts on some site and consider me "combative" is because when I disagree with something, I try to get the person I disagree to back up their assertions.

Example:

"Program X sucks, it's just really slow and buggy."

If I disagree, I'll respond with:

"That hasn't been the case in my experience. What version did you run? What hardware? How was it buggy?"

In over 90% of the cases, I can never get a response. The user typically goes into "Well that's just my opinion, aren't I free to have opinions?" which is known in debate circles as a "strawman argument" (i.e. trying to redirect the debate into a different topic -- I wasn't implying he didn't have a right to an opinion, but merely to explain where his opinion derived from.

One thing about techies is that there is something unusual about them compared to other people. They have an unusually high desire to demonstrate knowledge -- even when they really don't have any knowledge. Hence the situation you see above. Because typically when I do get real answers about why they think program X sucks it's "I used version 1.2 3 years ago and it crashed on my Windows 95 box so I'm going to assume it hasn't changed in 3 years and how it would run on my new Windows XP machine..."

This is particular prevalent in IRC where those most inclined to behave in this way 15 to 21 year olds, will usually confuse ignorant criticism for providing knowledge (everything "sucks" to these 15 to 21 year old IRC people even if they're only vaguely familiar with it - sometimes it only requires hearing someone else who barely knows it to say something sucks for them to say it sucks).

I tend to take the view of not expressing an opinion unless I can back up my assertion with evidence - i.e. because of my debating background, I try to be ready to defend any position I take with reason and logic.

Which brings us back to the beginning - in the skinning community, there is a higher percentage than average of the population that doesn't respond well to reason and logic -- emotion, feelings, instincts and "that's just how I feel" are much more prevalent.

So those of you reading this, what do you think? Do debates make you uncomfortable? Is it your view that people should be entitled to their opinion and speak that opinion without being called on it? Or do you feel that when someone gives an opinion on something that others are equally entitled to call them on it?

I don't think either answer is better than the other. Afterall, on the one hand you don't want people to feel like they can't give an opinion on something without being challenged all the time. And on the other hand it's lazy intellectualism to constantly give opinions based on vague "gut feelings".

What's your view?
17,240 views 70 replies
Reply #26 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I truly miss the times, somewhere in my twenties, when I was lucky enough to meet a lot of very remarkable people. It was very common that we would stay up till sunrise discussing things. Those conversations, which often turned into debates, were the most rewarding intellectual discussions I ever had. Most of my sense of who I am was formed in the joyous pursuit of truth that was a hallmark of those days and those conversations.
Reply #27 from WinCustomize Forums Top
..."It was very common that we would stay up till sunrise discussing things. Those conversations, which often turned into debates, were the most rewarding intellectual discussions"

Hehe David you took the words from my mouth, in your last thread

Now, I am trying to avoid the debates that lead nowhere, (for example, with The Jehovah witnesses), but I still believe that debates are the easiest way for the evolution of mankind.
I am sorry that my English are not good enough for participating in any kind of healthy debates; I wish I knew better English


Curtains - Customize Windows with additional styles
Reply #28 from WinCustomize Forums Top
You do fine Nikos... and jafo will fix anything you cock up.
I don't know a single word of Greek (except "betamax") so you're way ahead of me...
Reply #29 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Half the English language is derived from Greek (sligh exaggeration).

Anyway, according to the Grand Dictionary of crae it's like this:

1. debate = pointless, closed-minded spouting of opinions, supposedly backed up by "facts", in order to convince the audience. Politicians do it a lot and I find it repulsive.

2. discussion = open exchange of viewpoints, which has a constructive purpose.

Debates focus more on proving the audience that the other side is wrong and you are right, while discussions is not about personal glory but about progressing via said exchange of viewpoints.

Doreen is right you know, people who like to debate just like to talk/type and be heard.

I have this theory (I have many theories, none of them backed up by "facts") that people who like to debate are incapable of speaking in a compact, to the point manner. and try to hide this by focussing on specific details while ignoring others.
Reply #30 from WinCustomize Forums Top
By the way, if you want to see debating in its gory gruesomeness, visit kuro5hin.org or pick a random thread with more than fifty posts at DevArt.
Reply #31 from WinCustomize Forums Top
For once I can't be bothered to read through the whole thread before responding, so I apologise if I'm simply repeating something that someone else has said.

I think the obvious distinction here is that technically-minded people tend to debate based on documented facts and tend to take either one side or another - to a technical person there is a definate right and wrong answer to everything.

On the other hand, creative-minded people tend to debate based on feelings, emotions and experience. They rarely see simply a right or wrong side to a problem, but rather shades of right and wrong. The creative people tend to take a very non-commital stance to a debate, preferring to be the mediators, and only bringing up hard facts when they are what they perceive to be 'common sense' - ie. grass is green, ice is cold.

You'll certainly see a lot of debate amongst creatives, especially designers who have a bit of a reputation as being opinionated and fiercely protective of their ideas. However, when a debate consists of a technical person arguing with a creative, just stand back and watch the fireworks!
Reply #32 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Oops... WC just hiccuped...
Reply #33 from WinCustomize Forums Top
No it didn't...hehe...
Reply #34 from WinCustomize Forums Top
grayhaze....what if you are an artistic technician, or a technical artist?...
Reply #35 from WinCustomize Forums Top
One debate Doreen and I have touched on is a timeless one: "What is success?"
by Scribe Frogboy - 4/29/2002 11:07:58 PM

okay since I have this rep of going off topic, lets take a moment to go off topic and discuss "success" hehe

I think there is two kinds of success Brad

1. Physical and factual success like you like to have where you can "see it" and the majority of ppl agree it to be success along w/ you.

2. Non physical success where you "feel it" you cannot prove it but you only have a sense of it and it is something only the individual themselves set out to do and accomplish

most ppl want #1. and ppl that fall into that catagory expect everyone elses idea of success to be as #1.

okay now we have something new to debate on... hehe j/k

and I'm just spouting thoughts here I never really have facts to back up my stuff
Reply #36 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Jafo: Then you have the uncomfortable situation of thinking everyone's either right or wrong. :-\
Reply #37 from WinCustomize Forums Top
It's been my experience that those who criticize debating are usually not very good at it or are so close minded that they just want their unjustified views to be accepted as fact.

I'm not speaking of anyone here specifically, just a general observation I've seen in various places. The worst debaters I've met tend to be the people who often feel strongest (emotionally) about something and simply are closed minded. It reminds me of a recent debate where an individual claimed "Stardock is evil" but when called on it couldn't come up with a single legitimate reason to back up his claim and retreated to the old "What? Aren't I allowed to have an opinion?!"

Most of my constructive beliefs that I have today are the result of debates. Were it not for debates, my views would be a lot more "extreme" on many issues. Without someone challenging ones views and being forced to back them up, people tend to become more and more set in a particularly narrow view.

Let me give you a recent example:

My friend Sander (a liberal) and myself (a conservative) regularly debate the roles of governments and corporations and taxes. This time of year (Tax season) I get pretty annoyed about taxes because of the fact that half the population in the US pays basically nothing and the top 10 percent pays the majority of it.

But my friend Sander pointed out a perspective I never thought of:

"The wealthy do owe a disproportionate amount to society. It's not a matter of whether they receive equal services from the government but rather they receive an unequal benefit from having been part of this society. Bill Gates, born in Somalia would not be the richest man in the world. He'd be another starving Somalian in all likelyhood."

Up until then (And this was recently) I had tkaen the view that the government is just a service provider and hence why should I be charged more for their services than the next guy? I don't pay extra for electricity because of my income, why should I be expected to pay more for roads that I barely drive on?

But Sander's point was pretty compelling and hence moved me slightly left (I'm still pretty conservative of course) because he's right. Have enough conversations with enough intelligent people who are able to articulate their views and you gain a wealth of wisdom and knowledge. Hence why I like debates and dislike lazy intellectualism.
Reply #38 from WinCustomize Forums Top
craeonics have a very valid point. I like his definition.

Debate: pointless arguments meant to show off how intelligent you think you are.
Discussion: healthy exchange of ideas meant to try to broaden each party's ideas and views.

Yes, the more I think about it, the more I agree. Excellent input Crae, thank you.
Reply #39 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Technical people = Scully, Creative people = Mulder.
Reply #40 from WinCustomize Forums Top
jcg:: excellent points up there. debate wears me out sometimes, as i often end up discovering some person or other simply won't listen to evidence or facts that don't support their opinion. this is just savagely rampant in society, and it's unfortunate. there is that rare time when someone's opinion becomes enlightened [including mine] and that keeps me coming back.

the main thing that drives me to abject frustration in a debate [or a discussion, for that matter] is jcg's point number 2. this repugnant belief so prevalent in [especially american] society that -every- opinion is valid. it's simply not true. some opinions are wrong.

i've had to fight this professionally as well, since my degrees are anthropology and history. people want -so- badly to avoid the terrible things these disciplines were used for in the thirties, some will go to almost any lengths to keep from 'judging' any individual or group.

another big problem is mis-labeling opinions, facts and preferences.

preference:: i like blue.
opinion:: liking blue is immoral.
fact:: blue is a common favorite color, and is prevalent in nature [as the color of the sky] due to the refractive qualities of ozone in the atmosphere.
theory:: blue has a calming influence. note- this is a theory because it's been tested and has some support by various evidence.

it's easy to see that the opinion and the theory are the two that can be debated [the theory can be debated on the validity of the evidence.]
Reply #41 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Crae,
I thought that debates and discussions are the same thing; the only deference is that the one is taking place in private and the other in front of public, and as long we can't have any private discussion in any message board, so we call our public discussions, debates.

I don't think that Brad, who likes very much debating, has nothing to do with "closed-minded spouting of opinions, supposedly backed up by "facts", in order to convince the audience", in fact, he has always very constructive purposes and he is not at all, a close minded guy who wants his unjustified view to be accepted as fact.

I am just improving my English

Thanks David for the compliment






Reply #42 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Paxxy crae always has very good input I love to talk to him

I had this problem w/ looking at foreign dates such as:
when they put the day first the month second and the year last

to me that always looked inside out and drove me nuts cuz on my job in the past it effected legal problems for me when I attempted to file legal docs that were signed off as such and if I did not catch it I would have a wild goose chase trying to get the doctor to sign the doc again! argh!!!!!

anyways, back to the point, not only did I hate this cuz it caused me more work, "It jusss "LOOKED" funky and wrong to me!!!"

but crae explained to me that since most ppl already know the month the "day" should therefore be first (specially for lazy ppl) you can just glance at it and see the day first

to me 12/31/2002 should have been typed like that before
but now if I see 31/12/2002 I can see it's new years eve a split second faster now thanks to the dutchy KISS
hehe
Reply #43 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I think a lot of people don't like debating because it reminds them of high school or university courses where you were given one side of an issue (whether you believed in it or not) and had to engage in a debate.

I remember one particularly pointless debate we had in a French class, where we were debating showers vs. baths. Yes, it got us to practice our French, but it felt silly to defend something so pointless.
Reply #44 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Adni, I don't know about Brad since I don't know him personaly, but with maybe Brad's exception, Crae's point works perfectly for everybody I know.
You are right to say that debates are always done in public but discussions can be done in private as well as in public. But in a debate, the object is often to "nail" the other person and "win" the debate in the eyes of the spectators (or reader, in the case of a message board). There even exists some debating tricks and strategies, in order to get good "points" in the spectators opinions, exactly as if you were in a sporting event.
The best way to recognise those types of debaters is that they hardly ever have private discussions since there is nobody to impress... I don't think it's Brad's case, I think he mentionned often that he enjoyed private ICQ or email discussions.
In Brad's case, I say that he doesn't like to debate, he likes discussions, in private and in public.
Reply #45 from WinCustomize Forums Top
W/ Brad he'll just tire your butt out on a msg board by ou typing you! so jusss forget it if you think you'll win a debate w/ him! hehe
yes privately you might have a better chance but what if he talks in real life as much as he types OMG! hehe
Reply #46 from WinCustomize Forums Top
You are right paxx Brad likes discussions, that's why he opens so many but interesting threads, I don't think that he is trying to show off how intelligent he is
Reply #47 from WinCustomize Forums Top
paxx, thank you for the explanation
Reply #48 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Hmmmm...Strange! I don't consider the net a place to debate. I use the net for entertainment and pleasure. Also, I don't type very fast and often forget what I wanted to say in the next paragraph before I finish typing the previous one, which can be VERY frustrating!
I don't mind debating ANYTHING in real life, as I can talk much quicker than I type, and have the type of personality that allows me to deliver my point strongly.
So don't expect to see me in those long debating threads, unless it's to interject some humour into the proceedings. (in less than 20 words!)
Damn! I had something else interesting to say, but forgot it while I was typing the above!! Oh well.........
Reply #49 from WinCustomize Forums Top
You are something else BoXXi !
Reply #50 from WinCustomize Forums Top
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame21.html (that's me)

But seriously, just because Craeonics or Paxx want to redefine what the word "debate" is to being something ugly and nasty is meaningless.

As someone with considerable experience in DEBATING and DISCUSSING I can say that few people fit the stereotype that Craeonics and Paxx believe (that people who like to debate just want to show off intelligence).

Perhaps debating can be seen more as a strategy game where people of opposing sides attempt to use facts and evidence and sound arguments to convince a third party that their opinion is more valid than the other. Whereas as discussion in design to convince the other party to change their view.

Hence: Debates are about "winning" the hearts and minds of observers and discussions are about winning the hearts and minds of those you are discussing with.

Most of the people I have debated with are fun, intelligent, and caring people. Anyone who's spent much time on news://news.stardock.com/stardock.discussion.politics knows that all the people there are interesting fun OPEN MINDED guys and gals.

For me on skinning sites, I generally am into what you would term discussions. But I will get into a debate when someone makes a fairly radical statement that doesn't seem at all backed up by reality and challenge them to back up their claims.

For example, take Craeonics' statement:
"I have this theory (I have many theories, none of them backed up by "facts") that people who like to debate are incapable of speaking in a compact, to the point manner. and try to hide this by focussing on specific details while ignoring others."

Even Crae admits that his hypothesis is just a gut feeling. For instance, maybe he just feels that when I debate that I ignore some details and focus on others and hence has generalized ita ll to be all people who like to debate.

My response to that would be that those who like to debate are more verbose specifically because of the need for qualifications. A good debater qualifies their statements and that takes more time.

Afterall, it's a lot easier to just say "People who like to debate are close minded." That's pretty short. It's a baseless claim (or "a stated opinion" for you warm/fuzzy types )

COMPARED to a valid argument:

"People who like to debate are often appear as close minded when it comes to taking into account that other points of view may be valid. For example, on the website kuro5hin, there are several current debates (link link link) in which it's obvious from reading the whole of the responses that the people making the statements are not even reading what their opponents are saying. Instead, they focus on specific statements, make strawman arguments out of them in order ot bolster their already set in stone opinon. Given that the majority of discussions there seem to be that way, I feel it's valid to say that people who like to debate are close minded in general or at least on that site which I've seen no evidence to imply that it isn't that way elsewhere..." (btw, I dont' actually agree with this, I'm just demonstrating why a GOOD debater's posts are lengthier than a poor debater's posts).

You see how much more effort it takes to make a VALID argument than to make a baseless claim.