How to conduct a healthy discussion

[Dorjezigzag]

Not only is debate used in politics, it's also the basis for how court cases are resolved, with the outcome often (please note I haven't said "always", I'm aware there are far more factors than this) depending more on the debating ability of the barrister/advocate (I've forgotten what you call them in America !) than on truth and justice

Yes and you may find your self one day in a situation when you have to defend your self in a court style scenario. People need to develop there ability to construct sound coherent arguments with information to back it up. Life throws many accusations from many corners that one has defend oneself against, this is debate.

Many people desire change in this world and one of the ways this can be achieved is by presenting your contrary opinions to those that wield power. As they will attack and ridicule you will become involved in a debate, the above debating pyramid is useful in order to take the moral high ground and perhaps help to make them see your perspective.

A discussion ( as a conversation) becomes a debate ( a debating discussion) the moment there is disagreement, do you believe that if I have evidence that proves that someone’s statement is false that I should not present it just because I do not want to turn it from a discussion (conversation) into a debate (debating discussion)?

This can be done with respect as the pyramid helps us to avoid personal attacks that do not address the issue.

There are not necessarily winners and losers in a debate often a compromise can be forged between those debating, whereby one can learn from another, but the fact is in certain cases someone is right and someone is wrong. It is important we realise that we can all be wrong sometimes and not to humiliate the person who has been misinformed. Personally I am happy when someone points out my inaccuracies because I do not want to be living a lie or an illusion.

A lot of social conditioning encourages us to be non confrontational so we do not present our opinions . We need to become comfortable with debate and realise that disagreement is a part of life and enjoy sharing our true self and be interested in people’s critiques. Of course this needs to be done in a nurturing and positive way with respect , which rmorgan’s pyramid could helps us achieve.

[Selene]

One of the more subtle ways that discussions can head south is our very human tendency to think, actually, like computers. Our brains tend to interpret incoming information as yes/no, off/on, up/down, etc in binomial fashion, rather than appreciating the messy nuances of our intellectual or emotional environment as a spectrum that might include “mostly” and “sometimes” in the other person’s views.

This off/on switch leads to an almost instinctive response to any information that differs from our own – that the other’s view must therefore be 180 degrees opposite our own; that the other is diametrically opposed to us in all aspects. This is rarely, in fact, the case. We imagine ourselves metaphorically seated directly across the table from them, opposed in all. Do or die. I. Am. Sincere. They. Must. Be ….(you can fill in the blank right away, no?)

In reality, we are effectively seated in a circle of 360 degrees of views; the other may actually agree with us in many aspects. Others may be seated only a few degrees away from us in the circle of opinion.

I find it helpful when discussing a contentious topic to stop and seek out in my own mind those areas of agreement with others before responding overall (and – I’ll admit – I can be acerbic when provoked, but I’m working on that…) While this hugely reduces the impressively blunt hatchet force of the response, it converts it instead into a much more effective scalpel of commentary, an emendation of more manageable scale. And, if you are really feeling nefarious – a deeper and more lethal penetration into the other argument.

In practice, this means we can establish agreement with others by prefacing our further comments with:

• “That’s a very interesting point…”
• “I understand what you’re saying…”
• “I’ve felt that way myself…”
• “I agree that we need to…”

And the next word to avoid is “however…” That suggests the 180 degree setup.

Better words are:

• “at the same time…”
• “also here is…”
• “we need to consider…”
• and expressions that are additive rather than contrary.

And, when I really have a bombshell to drop on a (heaven forfend!) paying client who has asked my opinion, I phrase it thus: “Have you considered that perhaps…?” This allows them the face-saving harrumph, and yes of course…. I might even back cautiously out the door even further and say: “I’m sure you’ve thought of this, but I was wondering if perhaps….?” And if it’s really lethal I might add: “I don’t expect you to answer this question, but….”

Just some contributions here. This is a very worthy topic.

Cheers,

Selene

[songsfortheotherkind]

Posted by mariposafe (here)
Not only is debate used in politics, it's also the basis for how court cases are resolved, with the outcome often (please note I haven't said "always", I'm aware there are far more factors than this) depending more on the debating ability of the barrister/advocate (I've forgotten what you call them in America !) than on truth and justice.

It's like the rabbinic tradition of 'debating' the law, which essentially came down to figuring out the best way of getting around the law while looking good.

I personally withdraw from debates. I don't play chess or competition sport in the physical realm, why do those things as communication?

Debates always have winners and losers, why can't we just communicate in a friendly manner, discuss things amicably, without the need to defend a position that probably doesn't even need defending in the first place ?

*nodding* this is my thing too- the pyramid described here just felt like weight on my head- I can see the heteronomy just loving that kind of arrangement. I don't need anyone to prove anything at all to me and I won't defend my own experience. This leaves others free to judge the beejums out of me any way they see fit, which I have plenty of experience in having happen to me. I have no interest at all in judgementalism and this pyramid really helps those determined to be judgement to be *good* at it and feel good about that at the same time. *shrugs* It happens.

I'm far more interested in finding others with slidey minds, who want to play in the possibilities rather than nail each other to a tree, or the floor, or whatever.

[Selene]

Songs, your perfectly delightful and insightful posts - and your superb hosting at the Pub - need no justification.

We must all be grateful for the genuine diversity of Avalon - and the wonderful people, like you, who grace us with their hearts and selves. We each come here with special gifts; yours is the art of bringing joy wherever you go.

Cheers,

Selene

[Dorjezigzag]

the pyramid described here just felt like weight on my head- I can see the heteronomy just loving that kind of arrangement.

You claim that you do not like to debate yet with this statement you have entered debate. By refuting rmorgan's pyramid.

I see that the pyramid can offer a framework for decency such as not making snide insults 'that people whio favour the pyramid are heteronomy'.

In order that we can understand your prejudice, Who exactly are the heteronomy?

[Whiskey_Mystic]

Posted by Dorjezigzag (here)
A discussion ( as a conversation) becomes a debate ( a debating discussion) the moment there is disagreement, do you believe that if I have evidence that proves that someone’s statement is false that I should not present it just because I do not want to turn it from a discussion (conversation) into a debate (debating discussion)?

The difference between debate and discussion lies in the intention of the participants, not in whether or not there is a conflict of views.

Posted by Dorjezigzag (here)
but the fact is in certain cases someone is right and someone is wrong.

I understand what you are saying, but from my perspective I can out-debate almost anyone on any given subject if I have time to prepare. I can then switch sides and out-debate them again from the other side. This is a skill that I have. It is completely independent of whether or not I am right or wrong, so I question the value of it. This is why I value discussion and find debate useless.

[Strat]

Great thread!

My .02 cents is to continually improve your 'net character' or whatever. It takes character to be okay with letting people get their little quips in. It's not easy to do and that's why a very small percentage of people practice this. It's great though as it stops detrimental arguments instantly.

Usually the negative folks end up getting banned anyway.

[Timreh]

Important thread Raf.. why don't you tag it?

I'm sure there are some who might be looking for info like this, wanting to gain a better understanding of forum behaviour and etiquette.

[Dorjezigzag]

I can out-debate almost anyone on any given subject if I have time to prepare.

I would need to see evidence to back up this statement

my 8 year old runs rings round me sometimes!

I agree intention is everything, but the truth is the truth and even the best debater in the world will be found out in the end, not by being left alone but by being debated.

Whisky ultimately the definition of meaning to words is defined by the dictionary, there is some ambiguity but if the dictionary states a discussion can be a debate it can!

It was very poetic your statement regarding discussion and debate and I believe your intention was good but it was not a statement of fact.

Words evolve and perhaps in time the dictionary will have a different definition when the influence of whisky magic is felt!

Personaly my best debating happens in situations when my self or others are being attacked, I will defend the situation with no consciousness of what is happening. The words come out from who knows where. It is interesting how quickly the tables can be turned on an abuser. This is spontaneous with no planning, I believe it comes from source, from essence.

Of course on forums we have time to filter and process, which is why rmorgan's pyramid is so useful to asses our posts before we post

In this video we see how debate can be good, you also see that those that like to control do not like debate.

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3rImXI6Wv4

[Whiskey_Mystic]

Posted by Dorjezigzag (here)

I can out-debate almost anyone on any given subject if I have time to prepare.

I would need to see evidence to back up this statement

my 8 year old runs rings round me sometimes!

I agree intention is everything, but the truth is the truth and even the best debater in the world will be found out in the end, not by being left alone but by being debated.

Whisky ultimately the definition of meaning to words is defined by the dictionary, there is some ambiguity but if the dictionary states a discussion can be a debate it can!

It was very poetic your statement regarding discussion and debate and I believe your intention was good but it was not a statement of fact.

Words evolve and perhaps in time the dictionary will have a different definition when the influence of whisky magic is felt!

Personaly my best debating happens in situations when my self or others are being attacked, I will defend the situation with no consciousness of what is happening. The words come out from who knows where. It is interesting how quickly the tables can be turned on an abuser. This is spontaneous with no planning, I believe it comes from source, from essence.

Of course on forums we have time to filter and process, which is why rmorgan's pyramid is so useful to asses our posts before we post

In this video we see how debate can be good, you also see that those that like to control do not like debate.

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3rImXI6Wv4

Ha ha ha. I think you are trying to debate me, my friend. I decline to engage.

[Dorjezigzag]

You already did engage and debate me with this statement.

The difference between debate and discussion lies in the intention of the participants, not in whether or not there is a conflict of views.

I stated that the moment there is disagreement there is debate and therefore you refuted my statement, of course with no evidence

I'm glad you can laugh and take debate lightly too many people get so angry and carried away and your right there is no need to debate this issue, the dictionary is quite clear on this matter, issue is closed. I will quote it again just incase anyone missed it before.

dis·cus·sion/disˈkəSHən/
Noun:

The action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.
A conversation or debate about a certain topic

dis·cus·sion
   [dih-skuhsh-uhn] Show IPA
noun
an act or instance of discussing; consideration or examination by argument, comment, etc., especially to explore solutions; informal debate.


discussion
mid-14c., from O.Fr. discussion, from L.L. discussionem "examination, discussion," in classical L., "a shaking," from discussus, pp. of discutere "strike asunder, break up," from dis- "apart" + quatere "to shake." Originally "examination, investigation, judicial trial;" meaning of "talk over, debate"