Debating - Don't lose your cool or friend

[BMustee]

LOL...yeah! One topic (i think everyone knows which one) could have started a Bar fight!

 

{Sports-00020059}

[Guest]

Which topic?

[danmcq]

Fairy - It was the Clip or not to Clip Topic.

[DayosMom]

I liked what Tari said about a "fine line" between debate and arguing. Good point.

 

There is a difference between debate, and arguing. When there is arguing, no one benefits from it. You walk away with negative feelings, and a changed view of that person.

When there is a debate, each person involved can learn something new, and benefit from another's point of view, and knowledge on the topic. You can tell when a person is knowledgeable or not by the way they speak, and share information.

 

A knowledgeable person doesn't have to beat another into seeing something from their way of thinking. A knowledgeable person has nothing to prove. They share their information, and leave it for the taking or rejecting. They have nothing to prove.

 

Arguing is not healthy for anyone. Always in the end, there must be a winner and a looser.

 

Debating benefits everyone, because there is a sharing of knowledge. You chose to accept it or not. No Pressure.

KimMcQ

[nevjoe]

Well said Kim! Karma for you.

 

Joe

[lovemyGreys]

I agree with Joe, an excellent post Kim Very well put.

[nevjoe]

This is the best way to debate

 

 

 

Joe

[kiwibarb12]

I gather you have (very) short debates, nevjoe :blush: :blink: :laugh:

[judygram]

REal short if you ask me.:ohmy: :laugh:

[nevjoe]

Thanks Keys, I can always count on you.

 

Joe

[judygram]

And you always can count on me Joe, aka 2finger.

[nevval]

Dan, this is a great guideline, but you left out one thing here. Debating is the opportunity to get information on a subject in which a person can form an opinion. THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN!!

 

I had a fantastic college professor who pulled a fast one on some freshmen just out of high school. He had each student choose a subject they were for; pro life, pro choice, anti gay marriage, and so on. Then once the students turned in their topics, he made them do a paper supporting the opposite. Everyone was mortified that they had to write a paper supporting a topic they were against. In the end it was fascinating to see how this exercise changed their opinions because they actually had to research the facts and opinions of others. So debating can be a real learning experience if you listen to the arguments of others, and keep an open mind. People have a tendency to forget there are often two sides to everything. People let their personal experiences fog their brains.

 

There is a wonderful book called The House of Sand and Fog by Andre Dubus III, it was also adapted into a movie that shows just how possible it is for two sides to be right and wrong at the same time. I recommend this book highly; it will change the way you look at things. By the way, it is a fiction novel; it's not a self-help book or something.

 

Valerie

[fourtrap]

Right on Kim excellent post I agree

 

Benny

[danmcq]

Good point Valerie :-)

 

Your right, those watching or reading a debate can learn something from both sides. Hopefully, if they are interested enough in the topic, will go research it for themselves and come to their own conclusion.

[Richardsmommy]

Hey, all. Sorry I've been away (not that I think you've missed me unless your aim was off) but I've been battling pain and time-consuming projects. Y'all know how it is.

 

Those were good points mentioned and I'm glad they were posted, Dan. Can I also add a few more?

 

Let's try to understand the poster's motive and attidude in their post. Some people like to joke around and don't mean to offend anyone. Others are misunderstood because we can't hear tones and fluctuations. Other posts could be mis-punctuated, misspelled or misworded. Not all people are language majors, and that they're even putting temselves out there and trying should be applauded, not attacked.

 

Let's try not to take posts or statements in posts as direct put-downs, accusations, threats, etc unless it's obvious...and then don't just assume.

 

If we think it's an attack, we can post something like, "I'm sorry. I may have misunderstood you. I'm taking that statement as an attack on the way I care for my bird. Can you please explain what you meant?"...Maybe not quite as wally/Beave corny, but you know.

 

I've seen too many posts that are misunderstood. Because they're misunderstood, readers make a direct attack on that person, others join in, and the one misunderstood can't even try to explain what he meant because nobody wants to listen. Then the attacked fights back out of frustration and is then seen as brutal and everyone wants him out. And, if he is trying to apologize, accept the pology and move on.

 

Let's not carry feelings from one post into another, and let's try to avoid tainting a post based on what that person said in a different post. Someone makes a mistake in one post and that person is forever labled and treated as such in almost everything he posts.

 

Let's try not to accuse others for restating a post: "read the entire thread, idiot! I just said that in post #365!" People have their reasons for not being able to read all posts. Mine is that I can't sit long without excruciating pain (like i am right now). I'm sure I'm not the only one in pain. Others are that they don't have time to sit down and read every single post in every single thread (and don't accuse those who can as neglecting their birds and kids, or being internet addicts). It's easy to take a skip as an insult, but I'll tell ya, some posts are just too long to read every word (and I am aware that I'm occasionally guilty of lengthy-posting ).

 

These are some I've seen repeatedly in threads.

 

Hope I've been a help and not a hendrance.

[danmcq]

Hi Richardsmommy,

 

Thanks for the great comments on posting etiquette and the idea to give the other poster the benefit of doubt, rather than taking something as hostile. :-)

 

That is one of the reasons I absolutely hate :pinch: email at work. I avoid email conversations at all costs, if they can be handled face to face or via phone. The absence of tonal fluctuations and facial expressions :woohoo: makes reading how something was truly written almost impossible, with out the use of smileys, sad faces etc. :laugh: :woohoo: :side:

 

Thanks for pointing all these points out!!

 

Sorry to hear of you constant pain, you must be a strong person to deal with it day in day out and still find it in your heart to post as you do. I applaud you!!

 

Karma to you!!B)<br><br>Post edited by: danmcq, at: 2007/10/20 19:38

[Richardsmommy]

Thank you for your kind words, Dan.

 

"That is one of the reasons I absolutely hate email at work. I avoid email conversations at all costs, if they can be handled face to face or via phone."

 

Possibly because they don't want to face you, see your expressions, hear your tone...you see theirs (like a head-in-the-sand sort of way?) so they hide behind the big blue screen.

[Patsy]

Strictly speaking, debates are held by 2 or more parties in which each party takes a diffent stance and then each points out the merit of his/her stance. Debating is above arguing:laugh: A good debate can be very exciting.

However, I do remember wanting to debate the pros and cons of a previous president with a former boyfriend's father -- but that didn't turn out so great! He took it too personally.......

[Patsy]

I should also add, that maybe I need to go back and change one of my posts....

[cdelatorrejr]

I like the points that danmcq pointed out and I feel they should be used as guidelines rather than the rules of engagement. I think healthy debate is good. Its from this where we are able to see the other person's point of view; so much can be learned from others! I think positive exchanges can be achieved if we understand we are all connected, have a commonality (love of greys), have respect for one another and accept there are other opinions, viewpoints and ways to exist. I know when I have a debate with a close friend or family member, the conversation usually doesn't escalate but remains an exchange of ideas or opinions if I remember the things above. Stopping or pausing to gather my thoughts before responding seems to also work for me!

[Guest]

Patsy wrote:

Strictly speaking, debates are held by 2 or more parties in which each party takes a diffent stance and then each points out the merit of his/her stance. Debating is above arguing:laugh: A good debate can be very exciting.

However, I do remember wanting to debate the pros and cons of a previous president with a former boyfriend's father -- but that didn't turn out so great! He took it too personally.......

 

 

debating politics can easily turn nasty is my experience...

[danmcq]

Very good thoughts and responses All. :-)

 

I agree, Politics and Religion are too personalized in each individual to be debated. Without it soon turning in to an all out war between the two.

 

It is the very core beliefs each individual has personalized, accepted, put faith in and believed wholeheartedly for most their lives. It is the very essence of "Who" that person is.

 

I believe that is why, all of us, from all countries, faiths and beliefs can enjoy each others company so much. Even though we are truly worlds apart in other aspects of our lives.

 

With the "Greys" out of the picture. We would have never met or had a conversation at all, most likely. :-)<br><br>Post edited by: danmcq, at: 2008/07/26 18:29

[Talon]

I for one, LOVE that our greys have brought us from many different parts of the world, many different beliefs and many different faiths together as a family where we all respect each other.

 

Thank you Patsy, for bringing this thread back to life! A gentle reminder to have healthy debates here is always welcome. :cheer:

[matt314159]

Excellent points made by all. In fact, I hope you don't mind, but I copied the OP's post and stickied it at another forum I help out at (Small plug for the site, www.euphoricarythmia.com it's a general discussion forum where pretty much anything goes)

 

Anyway thanks for the posts, great stuff!

[Goralka08]

danmcq wrote:

 

Turn someone�s factual statements into implied preferences. For example, if someone mentions that not all Catholic priests are pedophiles, accuse the person who said it of siding with pedophiles.

 

 

OK. Is this a joke or what?! Can you please explain this? I don't think it's wise to accuse someone of "siding with pedophiles" just because they make a factual statement. Is this just a funny statement that would just rile someone up as an example? I am Roman Catholic and proud of it. While I think it's horrible what the bad priests have done, I also think that the bad ones give all the Holy ones a bad rap. There are some really great priests out there. Thanks.