Anonymous
11/4/2025, 8:56:54 PM
No.18134653
[Report]
What is the point of debate when triumphalism achieves the same result?
Just say "you lost, I won" and be done with it.
Anonymous
11/4/2025, 9:00:38 PM
No.18134660
[Report]
Debates are supposed to have an audience, which is informed by hearing two opposing viewpoints argued. The original goal of debate was to persuade the audience, not to change your opposite's mind. Such a thing is extremely unlikely, because anyone informed enough and skilled enough in rhetoric to engage in debate is very, very unlikely to be persuaded by arguments he has already considered and countered in preparation for the debate.
Kramnik is right
11/4/2025, 9:01:39 PM
No.18134662
[Report]
>>18134674
1. There is no point unless the two parties agree to a framework for determining truth.
2. It doesn’t.
Anonymous
11/4/2025, 9:05:20 PM
No.18134669
[Report]
Your goal is to change the minds of the audience, not your opponent. That's why political debates are always performed in front of live audiences or else are televised. There's no point in debating somebody in private, you're not going to change their mind if they have the spine to debate you in the first place.
Anonymous
11/4/2025, 9:08:36 PM
No.18134674
[Report]
>>18134662
So why did you try to debate Matt Dillahunty then?
