• thebartermyth [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    ‘Debating’ relies on a degree of trust that you don’t really get with random people so you’re kinda just talking to a wall unless you have some existing relationship. Like don’t let things slide (irl) just cause you don’t wanna fight about them, but in order to actually change someone’s mind they need to trust that you actually want what’s best for them.

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s why you use rhetoric, sophistry, dirty tricks, stage magic, appeals to emotion, and physical violence to win “debates”.

      Debating about facts with well sourced information and arguments is a bad way to change people’s minds. Scaring them, bullying them, flattering them, misleading them, tricking them, confusing them? Much more reliable.

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, from what I understand, yeah, it is better. Reasoned argument not only doesn’t change people’s minds, it often causes them to re-trench in their exsting beliefs to protect their ego and sense of self.

          Whereas a good polemic or some rhetoric side-steps that whole thing. Instead of telling them they’re wrong and explaining why you just try to get them real, real angry about something you’re angry about.