CMV: Debate is an ineffective means of discourse

In a debate, the whole point is to try to win. Both opponents have every incentive to try and use logical fallacies, point to faulty evidence, and even bring on emotional appeal. They don't try to learn much from the other side.

A better alternative in my opinion would be echo chambers. Both sides stay within their own safe space and circle jerk. Here's the magic though - when someone wants to be more open minded, they can just consume some of the other side's media. They can make their own decisions.

Let's look at two irrelevant, absurd ideas so we don't get controversy. Anarchist capitalism and anarchist communism. One can prove using facts and logic that neither can work, so this is a good example.

If an ancom wants to learn more about ancapism, they just have to watch a few ancap videos and see if they can find common ground (and vice versa). Some ideas can make sense, others probably won't.

This post is I guess more about spoken debate, and less so applies to internet forums. The reason is that online, your opponent has no face and you can therefore be more objective. I've heard somewhere that liking someone can make you more likely to agree with them. If this is true, then that can make a debate unproductive because it becomes more personal.

 
Edit 21:11 - I'm a bit fatigued now, so I won't respond much until later

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views**! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!