"Why Is It Hard For People, In General, To Debate Issues Without Getting Mad?"
|
2
points
2
points
I would say in general, that if someone is angry, one or the other of the debaters, is not actually debating but pontificating an opinion. For instance. In the Religion arguments I get "angry" kind of (more annoyed really) at USPS and NY - whatever the last two letter are - not because they disagree, but because they don't debate, they pontificate. On the other hand Lawnman disagrees with me regularly on everything from religion to politics, but I never get angry, because me and Lawnman debate eachother, we don't just state our opinions back and forth. Side: because they are not debating
Bullshit!!! ...disagrees with me regularly on everything from religion to politics,... Correction: openly disagrees with me regularly on 'some things' from religion to politics, For there are many instances I silently agree with you from religion to politics. We're better adversaries than allies. Perhaps other CD ers can learn to appreciate challenge over pats on the back. :) Side: because they are not debating
2
points
People get mad because what they believe they cannot prove. Their only recourse is to insult the other party or parties. To doubt one's own belief is defeat and to lose is something that is hard to swallow. Anger then follows because reason has failed. Down votes without reason is one example of this kind of behavior. Side: Defeat
How do you know people are mad? ALL CAPS? I participate on this site because it is fun and I enjoy having an opinion on everything! As for iamdavidh, the guys a douche, he'll ask a question and if you don't answer it the way he wants you to, you haven't answered it at all in his mind. I am honored that he mentioned me in one of his diatribes. Side: Defeat
2
points
As far as iamdaidh goes he isn't all bad for an atheist. I just read on another website that it is common among atheist to do what he does in some debates, were he takes your words and makes fun of them. They said it is because they cannot debate any other way, trying to defend something they cannot do. It is all in fun here anyway. Like anything said here is going to change the world. Side: Defeat
Because that is just how humans roll. When we are met with something we don't like we assume a position of being pissed off at that "thing". This easily applies to debate. When there is a issue (especially a heated one) that one doesn't agree with the first reaction is a knee jerk "Well this isn't nice... it MAKES ME MAD!!!". The problem is that a lot of people that bother to comment or discuss an issue don't bother to stop there angry side from unleashing itself; this results in angry debaters. Side: Human nature
2
points
I think that the problem rests with the fact that people tend to go over the top in their arguments, and simply forget that it is a debate and not a shouting contest. For instance, NVYN has been personally attacking me for a while now ever since he considered me an "illogical" debater. To him, I point a great big middle-finger that he cannot see and try to feel better about myself. Getting back on topic, people just think that their opinion matters more than somebody else's, and that this simple fact alone defines them as a "standout debater" or some other form of crap. Some people need to take a deep breath, and debate productively. Me? I use this site as practice for my debating competitions which I do at school, and I take rebuttal points that I find here and prepare myself for them should they arise in the official debate. Nobody could talk crap to me about my debating either, because in 7/10 debates I am usually named best speaker! So, summarizing, people tend to go over the top and forget this this is a debate and not a screaming match. Side: Human nature
Ok, first of all, when you write silly things and I point them out, you get all nuts and then you personally attack me first! If anyone else here reads your arguments they'd agree with me. Don't dish out insults when you can't take it yourself! I will soon be too busy to care about anything you gotta say here on CD, so you should appreciate every moment of time I spend arguing with you now. Some debaters can get me really wound up, especially those snorty nosed educated individuals who obviously think they're too good for me and they use all these uncommon languages to make that point. Those people make me sick.... Side: People make me mad
2
points
..and again, you assume your superiority, make use of "educated individuals" as a way to show your age as evidence of this superiority, and make me feel very uneasy. You need to relax, and just make an argument about fact and leave personal issues aside. Do you think that I say to you everything that I think of you? No, I have too much respect for everyone as individual human beings to just speak my mind all the time. You seem to have no problem talking to me as if I am less than you, and this is the problem that I have with you. Even if you don't think that you're doing this, you had better think again, because the very fact that I am complaining right now shows that I do have a problem with you. If you would simply keep in mind that this is a debating website that I use for my benefit in school competitions, and that I'm not here to just "pick fights," then I wouldn't have a problem with you. So, leave personal things out, they are irrelevant in certain topics, but if they are relevant, then don't direct them in a way that may offend somebody else. Side: People make me mad
2
points
1
point
People usually have trouble understanding the opinion of others. Everyone has different background and experiences. In certain parts of the country you need a gun for protection from predators and criminals. People in safe neighborhoods with reliable police protection think guns are not necessary for protection. People don’t always express themselves well. They assume that the background and experiences of others is the same as their own. So they embed assumptions in their statements without realizing that others don’t share those assumptions. For example, this question assumes that many debates result in anger (whether that is true is irrelevant). People have different personalities even with the same background and experiences. Their personality shapes the way they interpret their environment. A person with low self esteem will be wary of personal attacks. A confident person will expect others to not take things personally. People generally want confirmation of their opinions. Due to the above considerations they may not understand the opinion of the other person. When others disagree or are misunderstood it becomes stressful. Stressful people raise their voices and interrupt each other. Interruptions result in incomplete ideas being presented. Since people want their opinion to prevail, they will often insult their opponent instead of responding to the issue.
People do not like to be found wrong. Their reaction is usually to hurl personal insults.
At AV it is not possible to interrupt each other or raise our voices. People can present complete ideas. Unfortunately, we can then present well formed insults. Side: People make me mad
1
point
I find that this comment is both irrelevant and incorrect. For one, many debates exist without your presence, so it can be easily inferred that you are not the reason for anger for many people in the world. You are not the center of the debate community and many people could not care less about you, so do not equate yourself to greater causation. The reason that individuals frequently get angered during debates is for two reasons for two defined instances. One is shown above in superiority, but I would suspect this only occurs for individuals who are alienated from their topic and arguments. I have noticed this, but will not comment on this as it is discussed above. I have observed, and hope that this is the usual case, that much anger results from actual care about an issue. During a debate on a touchy subject, an individual may feel threatened when an opposing debater makes an argument that they find to ignore key points that were brought up. If, for instance, I am arguing pro-life and an individual makes a comment on how a fetus is not living, I may feel threatened by the idea, and that threat may eventually evolve into anger. This may result from one side feeling that the other is insensitive to a certain idea, through truth or misconception. However, passion is never a bad thing in debate. As long as it is directed properly, it can be a useful tool in argumentation. Side: Care
1
point
1
point
|
