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

191–200 of 386 posts

Re: I want to lose every debate

#191

Post by t43562 »

In my family we like arguing about things. Our way of doing so is quite animated and enthusiastic. We're trying to get our point heard of course but the real pleasure is perhaps that it is a fight in the sense of a water pistol fight or a game of rugby or something like that. It's mental exercise with excitement and humor.

It doesn't suit everyone and might seem alarming. Also we sort of play the game with the underlying attitude that it is all unimportant and that we admire and like each other.

The mind changing never happens then but sometimes it happens a few days later.

I HATE changing my mind but usually after I have I'm glad I did it. It's very uncomfortable but to say that nothing can change what I think would be to admit that I wasn't thinking anymore. It would be awful to be like that.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#192

Post by chengiz »

brmgb wrote: post #77

I find this article amusing. I think it puts forward something interesting but frame it completely incorrectly. The author doesn't actually want to lose debates even if it doesn't seem to realise it. He doesn't want to have debates at all. He just wants to have conversations with people and less preconceptions. That's something I'm completely in line with. I believe we suffer as a society from a collective excess of…

I agree he frames it incorrectly, but he has not failed in terms of results. If he framed it as "I want to talk to people", it would not be posted on HN, and no one would be visiting his site or discussing his shower thought.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#193

Post by SuoDuanDao »

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…

thank you. If I'm ever in a position of choosing a co-founder again, I'll probably ask potential candidates their opinions on debate and treat any positive sentiment towards debate as a negative signal. Few things are more tiring in an already difficult slog than needing to go to war every time you'd like to introduce a change.

I know some people are energized by debate, but I'd rather work with someone who builds my confidence rather than constantly attacks my ideas and, if those don't have any weak corners, my character and judgement. Nothing wrong with either preference, but the two shouldn't work together in my experience.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#194

Post by harel »

I chime well with the gist of this post. However, I think there is no win or lose in a debate. There is the sharing of perspective. The terminology of win/lose is a symptom of Side-ism which I believe humanity suffers from. People feel like they need to be on a side of something, which leads to people who feel like they belong to the "other side" feel left out and ignored, and then the wheel turns and then the other side feels the same. Each side tells themselves the other side is stupid/evil/ignorant/etc.

Instead they could have listened, compromised, come out of the assumption that neither side is wrong, and there should be a middle ground that works for all.

But instead we're stuck with side-ism and an everlasting shift from one extreme to the other, while the majority in the middle get car sick from all that violent movements.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#195

Post by fluoridation »

ajfwe wrote: post #111
dtx1 wrote: post #94

[flagged]

I have no idea how someone could not convincingly accept that. In modern western society, adultery, one of the worse possible civilization destroying crimes, is hardly even regarded as truly evil and is glorified in media. Especially when women do it.

>I have no idea how someone could not convincingly accept that.

So you mean that to you it's so obvious that shariah leads to peace that you have trouble understanding how someone might disagree? Then I assume that you completely agree with all aspects of shariah, right? Then why would achieving peace require killing homosexuals and apostates? Are those two specific groups particularly violent? It seems to me that killing is quite a violent act, so homosexuals and apostates would have to be really violent to justify outright killing them.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#196

Post by log101 »

> They lend me their shoes and glasses, so I can walk a mile with their viewpoint and experience it for myself.

I love this qoute and completely agree with it, it's always enlightening to "really" try to understand other people, without evaluating whether they're right or wrong. But the problem arises when you both start acting and your ideas clash. And you need to decide which is the "best" way.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#197

Post by peoplefromibiza »

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…

> don’t debate at all, just listen.

debates, even though I prefer the term discussions, are held between at least two parties.

I might sometime be the part who listens, but we can't both be listening, there will be no discussion.

So if you have something to say, say it and don't let anyone interrupt you.

Listening to what other people are saying means donating your time and attention, not everybody deserve it, there's a reason why "professional listeners" such as psychologists charge a lot of money to do it.

Most of the time people don't want to discuss, they simply want to talk about themselves.

Like the author of this piece.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#199

Post by erenyeager »

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…

Same experience with high school debate, there must be dozens of us.

Re: I want to lose every debate

#200

Post by BlueTemplar »

xiphias2 wrote: post #154
iinnPP wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>close relatives who are denying that killing other people is bad Nobody, except people with legitimate mental health issues, thinks killing is a "good" thing. Your close relatives believe Russia is on defense. Kind of like how the US was on defense in Iraq. So, from their perspective, the way to save lives is to negotiate an end to the war where Russia takes that tiny bit of land, and Ukraine stops being considered…

What's interesting in this is how many people still think that in politics there's a ,,good side'' and a ,,bad side''. Europe would stay much stronger together with Russia, so it was worth for US to increase the conflicts between the two powers (destroying Nordstream wasn't the nicest move). Putin was used to high gas prices making his power the highest, but he wasn't used to the power of LNG that US has, as it's the…

Russia has been developing its own LNG with the French know-how and with Chinese money, and while the volumes that EUrope imports are still relatively small, they are now only an order of magnitude smaller than pipeline methane at its peak... and growing.

It's also questionable just how long the US will be able to afford to export that methane (phase change isn't free), since the related tight oil seems to already have peaked ? (Maybe a few decades still ?)

Post reply on HN