Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I want to lose every debate

sive.rs

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 386 posts

Re: I want to lose every debate

#101

Post by ImHereToVote »

mihaic wrote: post #95

The first time I saw US-style collegiate debate, it seemed like a great mind-game. Over time I've come to consider it though as the sign of a bullshitting culture, where the truth is irrelevant, and winning the argument is all that matters. Professional debating and the article both feel wrong since they're missing the key element to me: synthesis of opposing ideas into something more than each individual side. It mi…

It's the difference between being right and winning. Not the same thing. The best way to be right is to change your mind, since the odds that your model of reality matching with reality are stacked against you.

If you don't plan for failure, you plan to fail.

If you don't plan for being wrong, you plan to be wrong.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#102

Post by jagrsw »

There are debates which are illuminating (esp. when you first time hear some ideas), you get new POVs and see excitement in the speaker's eyes, and even numbers/data might add up to a point, but the overall ideas might be harmful/dangerous/impractical/too-nuanced/in-theory-sure-but

Examples:

  - People should believe in god(s) b/c people believing in god(s) are more stress-resistant and are overall happier -> improvement of life quality
  - Everyone should pay the same amount of taxes - since they get from the state on avg the same amount of services -> fairness
  - Everyone should be paid the same for any kind of job if they put the same amount of effort/time -> fairness
  - Geopolitics can be described in a few catchy phrases (esp. in hindsight) - zero-sum games, rimland/heartland etc.
  - Richer and more achieved should have more kids (by law or consensus) than poorer ones -> it'll improve human gene-pool wrt cognitive capabilities
People formulating and believing (and sometimes acting on) such and similar ideas are not rare. Having them as family, friends, colleagues, random interlocutors at a party and entertaining their train of thought, sure. But considering them as a partner in a company, advisor, someone you elect for public office... not so much.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#103

Post by avaika »

This is all fun until you talk to someone who is absolutely brainwashed or alien to a peaceful behavior.

Do you really want to lose the debate to flat earth advocate? Do you want to lose a debate to a war aggressor supporter? Do you want to lose a debate to a serial killer?

I bet you don't.

PS. Maybe I didn't get something right, but I suffered a lot in conversations with close relatives who are denying that killing other people is bad in the light of ongoing war in Ukraine :(

Re: I want to lose every debate

#104

Post by inglor_cz »

mandmandam wrote: post #43
_cenw wrote: post #23

Understanding perspectives is a useful skill. But it's not where having an educated opinion ends. I understand the desire of US fossil fuel companies to do fracking. They're not stupid or comically evil. But they can be greedy, misguided, selfish and too focused on short term gains (if you want to be extra accustory, "within their lifetime"). If you then move over to how much astroturfing is involved in pushing throu…

Fracking is textbook comic evil. Say there's a comic book where fossil fuel co's worked to permanently ruin the groundwater and increase earthquakes in a region - bribing lawmakers and fucking over the people who lived there, gagging scientists, etc - all just for a resource that is literally burning the planet... So they can upgrade their megayacht/private jet... I'd find it hard to believe that others could allow i…

Not-fracking gives an enormous leverage to the Saudis, who are textbook comic evil as well. A medieval theocracy slowly transforming itself into a modern authoritarian country, dissolving dissidents in acid on the way.

Or to another major producer, Putin's Russia stuck in the Stalinist imperial mindset.

Pick your poison.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#106

Post by hummingn3rd »

tsuujin wrote: post #21

I’d like to offer an alternative framing: don’t debate at all, just listen. While high school debate did teach me many positive lessons and I am thankful that I spent four years of my life doing it, many years later I have come to understand that it also taught me something truly negative: that the point of a conversation is to win. I have put a lot of time in my adult life unlearning that trait, and reflecting on th…

That makes me think of The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don't https://g.co/kgs/2eXND7

Re: I want to lose every debate

#107

Post by mejutoco »

dayjaby wrote: post #69
noud wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When someone tries explaining something to me, I try to summarize what this person said when they are finished. E.g., "So you're saying that " or "It seems like ". This forces me to actively listen and remember what the other person has said. Afterwards, I'm looking for a response in the lines of "That's correct!" or "That's right!", or a correction and explanation that I haven't heard it correctly. Even if I don't a…

Reminds me of the interview with Jordan Peterson, where the interviewer said "so you're saying that ". So I agree with you as long as you don't fall into that trap of putting false words in the other mouth.

It is also useful if the other person won't accept any other phrasing that word-by-word quoting, even if in good faith, and accurate. It shows they are not willing to compromise.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#108

Post by slowwriter »

dayjaby wrote: post #69
noud wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When someone tries explaining something to me, I try to summarize what this person said when they are finished. E.g., "So you're saying that " or "It seems like ". This forces me to actively listen and remember what the other person has said. Afterwards, I'm looking for a response in the lines of "That's correct!" or "That's right!", or a correction and explanation that I haven't heard it correctly. Even if I don't a…

Reminds me of the interview with Jordan Peterson, where the interviewer said "so you're saying that ". So I agree with you as long as you don't fall into that trap of putting false words in the other mouth.

In situations where someasks "so you're saying that..." followed by something they didn't say it might very well be on purpose, but in other cases being explicit about how you understood someone can allow them to elaborate and correct your understanding.

It's much better than just continuing the conversation under a false assumption.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#109

Post by FlyingSnake »

avaika wrote: post #103

This is all fun until you talk to someone who is absolutely brainwashed or alien to a peaceful behavior. Do you really want to lose the debate to flat earth advocate? Do you want to lose a debate to a war aggressor supporter? Do you want to lose a debate to a serial killer? I bet you don't. PS. Maybe I didn't get something right, but I suffered a lot in conversations with close relatives who are denying that killing…

Of course the will be outliers and edge cases for most of the advice you receive. This observation from Derek is more or less a guideline, not an iron rule. He's not advocating to forgo common sense when dealing with people.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#110

Post by badcppdev »

psychphysic wrote: post #40

It bothers me that people argue so poorly. That's why debate exists. And why some people excel at podcasts Joe Rogan being an examplar. His best debates have very similar formats. "Tell me about"/"why do you think" "What about X" "So you're saying Y?" "Wouldn't that mean Z" People are bothered because he rarely ever seems to shoot others down just gets them to lay out their points and fleshout reasoning. The only tim…

You seem to be stating that Joe Rogan's 'best debates' aren't debates so much as interviews.

I'm bothered that you describe that as a debate.

Post reply on HN