Fair debating

[Baker]

What kind of guidelines make up a fair debate and what should be accepted as evidence.
Since we are posting on a forum all we have is links to news sites and site stating personal opinions so which ones should be accepted and which ones should not.
You are welcome to add some more points that would make it a fair debate.

With this being a Skeptic forum, you would think most arguments should be easily settled with the facts but decide what is facts or not is tough task how can this be worked out?

fair debate: fair forum : fair administration : fair moderation.
Is all you need.

Thanks,
S&S

[Pyrrho]

This might help:

http://www.csicop.org/si/2001-07/criticism.html

[Baker]

Thanks for the link pyrrho but I wasn’t referring to skeptic believer debates they are self explanatory I was referring to the political debates he have here in the P&C forum.

[Lurker]

All evidence is subjective. Each places a certain value on specific types of evidence. Anecdotal does not mean too much to me but to someone else it can mean a lot. Now a study with a good statistical sample size can be much more interesting.

As for the rules, well, I think a certain amount of respect is needed. Also, people should not jump around too much. I dislike long rambling posts as people rarely have good exchanges as so many questions or points are snipped.

Lurker

[Mel]

Since we are often dealing with issues that affect such large groups of people (and countries).... there will almost always be somebody that is dissatisfied with some policy or a law. Their reasons might be perfectly valid for their frame of reference and yet rightly invalid to another person.

In politics it seems there is almost never a clear cut right & wrong.

Fair debate and respect might come from remembering that one side is not automatically wrong just because the other side is right.

[Lurker]

Originally posted by Mel

Fair debate and respect might come from remembering that one side is not automatically wrong just because the other side is right.

Mel, flat out, you are wrong and I am right. I don't know how I can make it any plainer to you.

P.S. good luck on that other thread with WMT1.

Lurker

[Baker]

Originally posted by Mel
Since we are often dealing with issues that affect such large groups of people (and countries).... there will almost always be somebody that is dissatisfied with some policy or a law. Their reasons might be perfectly valid for their frame of reference and yet rightly invalid to another person.

In politics it seems there is almost never a clear cut right & wrong.

Fair debate and respect might come from remembering that one side is not automatically wrong just because the other side is right.

That’s not a bad policy but most people believe their view is the correct one sure there many topics that or just personal opinions.
However, there are right and wrong issues you notice most people pick a side of the argument based on their politics.

For a skeptic board shouldn’t every one, strive for the truth in every issue.

[Aardvark_DK]

Face it, most people just want to scream out their views and wouldn't change their minds about anything in a million years.

Anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot.

[Pyrrho]

http://www.cs.utah.edu/~mflatt/bumpy/iwasright.html

...and here's the WAV file...

http://www.cs.utah.edu/~mflatt/bumpy/song.html

[Baker]

Originally posted by pyrrho2000
http://www.cs.utah.edu/~mflatt/bumpy/iwasright.html

...and here's the WAV file...

http://www.cs.utah.edu/~mflatt/bumpy/song.html



No those are the wrong links pyrrho

[Mel]

Originally posted by Baker


That’s not a bad policy but most people believe their view is the correct one sure there many topics that or just personal opinions.
However, there are right and wrong issues you notice most people pick a side of the argument based on their politics.

For a skeptic board shouldn’t every one, strive for the truth in every issue.

Of course most people believe they are right BUT a person that is looking for an honest debate does not enter the room with a closed mind and is not always afraid to change his/her opinion.

A debate/discussion can be successful you are able to present your own view well enough so the other side can walk away respecting you and your opinion.

As I said before, I don't think there is an absolute truth in politics so I don't think there can be a right or wrong. What is right for a citizen in the USA might be very different for a citizen of the UK. What is right for a Catholic might be totally wrong for a Jew. And so on.....



Originally posted by Lurker
Mel, flat out, you are wrong and I am right. I don't know how I can make it any plainer to you.

Now that you mention it, I agree with you. So are we both right now or both wrong? Feel free to change your position. I know, I might. :D

Btw.... you never mentioned celebrities & freedom of speech did you? No reason.... I'm just taking a little survey. Hehehe

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Baker


With this being a Skeptic forum, you would think most arguments should be easily settled with the facts but decide what is facts or not is tough task how can this be worked out?

First people have to be willing to argue based on the facts. To many here, rhetoric is more important. It may be possible to win an argument on rhetoric alone, but it does not help solve real problems in the real world. I have started threads in the past trying to get past the BS. But several people don’t like that idea.

Most recently I started one about reason and the war:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=16903

A couple of people just plain rejected the concept of keeping their calm.

Also Tricky had a good thread on lies that got a couple of interesting responses from JK and Franko:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=10163&highlight=company

Unfortunate, some people would rather argue from hot hair than facts.

[Baker]

Originally posted by Doubt


First people have to be willing to argue based on the facts. To many here, rhetoric is more important. It may be possible to win an argument on rhetoric alone, but it does not help solve real problems in the real world. I have started threads in the past trying to get past the BS. But several people don’t like that idea.

Most recently I started one about reason and the war:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=16903

A couple of people just plain rejected the concept of keeping their calm.

Also Tricky had a good thread on lies that got a couple of interesting responses from JK and Franko:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=10163&highlight=company

Unfortunate, some people would rather argue from hot hair than facts.

Thanks for Doubt all have look at them

[Dancing David]

Compared to unmoderated boards this one seems to do pretty well, i do not that it seems to be the posters who help maintain the civility here.
Peace
dancing david