I am very poor in debate. I want to learn any trick or a framework which helps me to counter anyone in debate ?? Anyone have ?
7 comments
Educate yourself on the subject. Knowing the facts is superficially helpfull, but useless if you do not understand the cause and effect relations of what you are discussing.
Also, be humble. Acknowledge when your opponent makes a good point and never resort to insult. Call them out if they insult you.
And lastly be sure to scan your opponents arguments for logical fallacies.
If you understand what you’re talking about and you genuinely believe your point of view there is no reason why you should struggle to find a counter argument. Either way, you either educate someone else, or you educate yourself. So it’s win-win.
Don’t make it an argument but a discussion.
I’d be curious what types of things you debate about with people, and why the energy spent on it is important
Pretend you’re posting on Reddit.
Keep asking questions, and spin the answers into things that no one said and then proceed to give a huge lecture on the totally unrelated subject.
Contrary to popular belief, you *dont* need to know what you’re talking about. Just say it with correct grammar and throw in a fancy vocabulary word every now and then and you’re good.
Remember, the key to a debate is to pretend youre posting on Reddit. On Reddit **no one** will ever admit they’re wrong, even with evidence. You just wanna sound like you’re smart to people who also have no idea what they’re talking about.
Extra points if you can tie it into politics or a huge societal issue. Even more points if you can throw in some kind of low effort pun or dad joke
**Example:** “People shouldn’t put tartar sauce in breakfast cereal”
**Expert Reddit debater:** “Is there something kind of law saying what people aren’t allowed to do to their own meals that they paid for? Normal and well adjusted people don’t care at all what other people are doing to their own meals. It’s actually been proven that tartar sauce is a good source of Omega 3’s and biotin, which are usually missing from the typical American diet. Perhaps you should read more before you start dictating what people aren’t allowed to customize their own meals with. Just because YOU don’t like something doesn’t mean that your way is ideal or better than other versions. This is the exact same mindset that resulted in the election, and now millions of lives are now affected because of your ill-informed desire to pontificate and control the actions of others that don’t affect you in ANY WAY AT ALL. Mind your own business instead of giving unsolicited input as to how people can enjoy their breakfast.”
*Disclaimer – I have no idea if tartar sauce actually has Biotin or Omega 3’s, I made that bullshit up*
It honestly depends on waht you mean by “debate”. Do you mean, talking with people in a social setting about a topic like politics. Is your goal to convince them of your side or is your goal to simply make it out without offending anyone?
On the other hand, debate like the team sport debate that is often done through schools or academic clubs? That’s an entirely different animal as the rules are quite strict and you can store “points” and eventually “win” without actually convincing anyone of anything.
Aristotle wrote in “On Rhetoric,” that people’s opinions are swayed by three things:
Logos, Pathos, and Ethos
Logos is the words and logic of your argument. Does it make sense and is the speaker articulate?
Pathos is the emotional resonance of the argument.
Does the speaker get the audience angry or passionate or sympathetic about their side of the argument?
Ethos is the character of the speaker.
Do they seem trustworthy and sincere? Do they seem knowledgeable and qualified to talk about the subject?
The most effective speakers use all three. They are well spoken and their arguments are logically straightforward. They make their audience feel emotionally connected to their cause. And they convince the audience that they know what they’re talking about and can be trusted.
The first step is recognizing what is worth debating, and who is worth debating with. There are many topics that people will not change their mind on, and those people are not worth debating. The best you can do for these people is set an example, via your actions, that supports your values and notion. This will open their mind more than any argument usually does.
The next step is to recognize logical fallacies, and be able to call them out when they occur, as they weaken the opposition’s stance. This will help you not fall into those same traps and keep yourself accountable with the facts and arguments you put forward.
Finally, be well-versed in the topic of your position. Be able to provide sources, personal experience, and any helpful metaphors or rhetoric that can assist your position, but your stance must remain in strong logic and peer-reviewed evidence. Not every “take” is a “take” because there are people that build their reality based entirely off their emotion and willfully ignore objective evidence that contradicts them.
The goal should never be to change someone’s mind, but rather use their debate as feedback for your own perspectives. This means that you don’t feel you failed if you didn’t change their mind, the best you can hope for is not to change their mind but merely open it up a bit more.
7 comments
Educate yourself on the subject. Knowing the facts is superficially helpfull, but useless if you do not understand the cause and effect relations of what you are discussing.
Also, be humble. Acknowledge when your opponent makes a good point and never resort to insult. Call them out if they insult you.
And lastly be sure to scan your opponents arguments for logical fallacies.
If you understand what you’re talking about and you genuinely believe your point of view there is no reason why you should struggle to find a counter argument. Either way, you either educate someone else, or you educate yourself. So it’s win-win.
Don’t make it an argument but a discussion.
I’d be curious what types of things you debate about with people, and why the energy spent on it is important
Pretend you’re posting on Reddit.
Keep asking questions, and spin the answers into things that no one said and then proceed to give a huge lecture on the totally unrelated subject.
Contrary to popular belief, you *dont* need to know what you’re talking about. Just say it with correct grammar and throw in a fancy vocabulary word every now and then and you’re good.
Remember, the key to a debate is to pretend youre posting on Reddit. On Reddit **no one** will ever admit they’re wrong, even with evidence. You just wanna sound like you’re smart to people who also have no idea what they’re talking about.
Extra points if you can tie it into politics or a huge societal issue. Even more points if you can throw in some kind of low effort pun or dad joke
**Example:** “People shouldn’t put tartar sauce in breakfast cereal”
**Expert Reddit debater:** “Is there something kind of law saying what people aren’t allowed to do to their own meals that they paid for? Normal and well adjusted people don’t care at all what other people are doing to their own meals. It’s actually been proven that tartar sauce is a good source of Omega 3’s and biotin, which are usually missing from the typical American diet. Perhaps you should read more before you start dictating what people aren’t allowed to customize their own meals with. Just because YOU don’t like something doesn’t mean that your way is ideal or better than other versions. This is the exact same mindset that resulted in the election, and now millions of lives are now affected because of your ill-informed desire to pontificate and control the actions of others that don’t affect you in ANY WAY AT ALL. Mind your own business instead of giving unsolicited input as to how people can enjoy their breakfast.”
*Disclaimer – I have no idea if tartar sauce actually has Biotin or Omega 3’s, I made that bullshit up*
It honestly depends on waht you mean by “debate”. Do you mean, talking with people in a social setting about a topic like politics. Is your goal to convince them of your side or is your goal to simply make it out without offending anyone?
On the other hand, debate like the team sport debate that is often done through schools or academic clubs? That’s an entirely different animal as the rules are quite strict and you can store “points” and eventually “win” without actually convincing anyone of anything.
Aristotle wrote in “On Rhetoric,” that people’s opinions are swayed by three things:
Logos, Pathos, and Ethos
Logos is the words and logic of your argument. Does it make sense and is the speaker articulate?
Pathos is the emotional resonance of the argument.
Does the speaker get the audience angry or passionate or sympathetic about their side of the argument?
Ethos is the character of the speaker.
Do they seem trustworthy and sincere? Do they seem knowledgeable and qualified to talk about the subject?
The most effective speakers use all three. They are well spoken and their arguments are logically straightforward. They make their audience feel emotionally connected to their cause. And they convince the audience that they know what they’re talking about and can be trusted.
The first step is recognizing what is worth debating, and who is worth debating with. There are many topics that people will not change their mind on, and those people are not worth debating. The best you can do for these people is set an example, via your actions, that supports your values and notion. This will open their mind more than any argument usually does.
The next step is to recognize logical fallacies, and be able to call them out when they occur, as they weaken the opposition’s stance. This will help you not fall into those same traps and keep yourself accountable with the facts and arguments you put forward.
Finally, be well-versed in the topic of your position. Be able to provide sources, personal experience, and any helpful metaphors or rhetoric that can assist your position, but your stance must remain in strong logic and peer-reviewed evidence. Not every “take” is a “take” because there are people that build their reality based entirely off their emotion and willfully ignore objective evidence that contradicts them.
The goal should never be to change someone’s mind, but rather use their debate as feedback for your own perspectives. This means that you don’t feel you failed if you didn’t change their mind, the best you can hope for is not to change their mind but merely open it up a bit more.