So You Wanna Fight? ATS Debate Tournament (Tournament Update)

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
My debating tactics?

Sure, I don't mind sharing.

Neither do I...

First ten minutes - Read my opponent's argument.

Second ten minutes - Consider the flaws in my opponent's argument with consideration towards my already contemplated position.

Next twenty one hours and forty minutes - Goof off.

Last two hours - Write like a hypnogogic extrapolator.

It's worked a few times in the past...

Originally posted by MemoryShock

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
My debating tactics?

Sure, I don't mind sharing.

Neither do I...

First ten minutes - Read my opponent's argument.

Second ten minutes - Consider the flaws in my opponent's argument with consideration towards my already contemplated position.

Next twenty one hours and forty minutes - Goof off.

Last two hours - Write like a hypnogogic extrapolator.

It's worked a few times in the past...

edit on Thu, 30 Sep 2010 18:14:41 -0500 by MemoryShock because: Spelling.

OK, I'll play along.

For 1 hour, write.

For 23 hours, cross my fingers and pray to the great spaghetti monster.

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher

debating tactics?

Insult your opponent shamelessly until they feel compelled to defend themselves, at which point you point out how they're not even addressing the issues. If they accuse you of insulting them, ridicule them for being too sensitive. If they insult you back, cry foul and demand a moderator put them in line. Either way, whatever time they spend fighting is less time they're spending focusing on the issue. This benefits you.

Constantly demand proof. This will distract them and waste their time. If they provide sources, don't waste your time reading them. Instead just accuse your opponent of misunderstanding or misquoting them. Nobody else will read them either.

Appeal to the emotions of the audience. Remember that you're not trying to convince your opponent. You're trying to convince the audience. Fact, reason and logic don't sway people. Emotion does. Encourage your opponent to give logical reasons for things, and when they do, accuse them of being a cold-hearted, selfish monster who cares nothing for the children. Not only will the audience see him as clearly the bad guy, it will throw him off his game so his future arguments will be less coherent.

Creatively use pronouns to create a sense of rapport with your audience, and identify your opponent as an outsider who cannot be trusted. "We" all know that I'm right. But "he" just doesn't get it. People will usually agree with people they identify with, because they don't like to feel wrong themselves. If they identify with you, and you're wrong, they they must be wrong too. So clearly you must be right.

Always put the burden of proof on your opponent. Insist that you are right by default. If you are asserting that something is true, demand that they prove that it isn't. If you are asserting that something is not true, demand that they prove that it is.

Tell people in no uncertain terms what they should believe. Repeat yourself often. Don't waste your time giving reasons for this. People don't think in reasons, but if they hear something enough times it will tend to stick with them.

If you do decide to give reasons, be vague about it. Dismiss them as so obvious that there's no need to go into detail. Your audience will be hesitant to question you, since they don't want to feel like idiots who don't understand. It's easier for them to simply accept your position. If your opponent asks for you to explain, remind the audience that he can't even understand your argument. And since they do, they get to feel smart. People prefer to feel smart than to feel like they don't understand something. They will find it easier to side with you so they get to feel smart than to side with your opponent and feel like they don't understand.

Draw attention to the weakest portion of your opponents argument. If they make ten statements and nine of them make a lot of sense, ignore those and draw attention to the one that dosen't.

Focus on exceptions and special cases. If an opponent lists 3 examples that are generally relevant to most situations, and one that is only relevant under rare circumstances, ignore the general examples and focus on the example that only applies to rare circumstances. Point out that it only applies to rare circumstances, and therefore your opponent is wrong because he's ignoring most cases.

Tell lies that will make your side look stronger. If your opponent points out that you're lying, accuse them of resorting to personal attacks.

Accuse your opponent of logical fallacies, and cite the latin names for those fallacies. Don't bother looking for fallacies, just make the accusation. Most audiences won't know the difference, and will simply assume you know what you're talking about. If your opponents points out that you don't, accuse him of not understanding. Since you've quoted obscure latin phrases, obviously you're an expert and know what you're talking about better than he does.

Make a point of accusing your opponent of strawman arguments at least once. Like latin, most people don't know what this means, but if you can convince the audience to dismiss one argument for no good reason, it will be easier to get them to dismiss more in the future.

No matter how little you have to say, never admit defeat. Keep the debate going as long as possible. Sooner or later your opponent will get bored or frustrated and give up, allowing you to win by default.

reply to post by LordBucket

You would be fun to debate...

reply to post by LordBucket


Actually that's generally how people debate on this site most of the time anyway.

reply to post by LordBucket


Sounds like my ex-wife's divorce attorney. Instead of logic and reasoning, just sew confusion and complication in your opponent. I'm sad to say, that it works. LOL


--airspoon

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Fourth hour:
I will take Fido for a walk. There is real nice bike trail through the woods that leads to a park
with ducks and geese, with four soccer fields and with the leaves turning
it will surely be a nice view, with the young hotties jogging, or the old couple walking early or
late in the evening, there are always people on the trail. Often there are deer and other wildlife
lounging around in the field or off the path in the woods. Fido often
whines if he doesn't get to hike up his leg on everything and pretend like he
is marking his territory, even though his bladder is often very empty. I'm
not one to say no to Fido and his walks. He is a boston-french terrier and has a lot of attitude.

Huh, looking back at this post I made I notice that the first letters of each line seem to spell out:
"I will win".

I wonder if that was deliberate or not? Sometimes my strategies even confuse me

Ah... probably a red herring

Are we having fun, yet?
-ET

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher

Are you taking notes from my Off_The_Street debate...

I totally remember when I searched for that type of pattern in newspapers...I guess the rewards weren't worth the continued usage...well played, Sir...

please feel free to disregard this post

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher

Too late...I read it...and found it quite interesting...constant state of inebriation, eh...you must have read the Fight Club Pub as well...

reply to post by MemoryShock


um....uh... wa??

Added to preferred reading list: this one?
Off_The_Street
ancient tech debate?

Fight Club Pub

,
ET

p.s. ...
Pay attention to the first two phrases
Munitions Unto A Simian

reply to post by whatukno

that's generally how people debate on this site most of the time anyway.

Sort of why I posted it.

I'm hopeful the debate will hold itself to higher standards, but I also recognize that irrational handwaving and mindless repetition are often more effective tools than huge piles or evidence or well thought out arguments.

reply to post by LordBucket

The debates are at a much higher standard...unless your debating semperfortis...

OK Guys..

Can we keep the "Off Topic Chit Chat" to a minimum please?

30 minutes left to confirm and I need to be able to follow the time line..



Semper

reply to post by semperfortis

Would it be permissible to start a BTS thread for the tournament?

reply to post by MemoryShock


BTS??? What's that? Perhaps you mean an Off Topic thread......

Here is the list of those that have confirmed..

Debate Confirmed..

Chissler
Whatukno
LordBucket
Romantic_Rebel
MemoryShock
Airspoon
Esoteric Teacher
OzWeatherman
KrazyJethro
jennybee35
Rising Against
Spikey
Skyfloating
Hotbakedtater
Westcoast
Pinke
spy66
orange-light
Nosred
operation mindcrime
Zarathustria
saltheart foamfollower
JimIrie
abe froman
wormwood13
OnceReturned
ProtoplasmicTraveler
naeem11111
Death_Kron
Getreadyalready
The Djin
ModernAcademia
Budski
DevolutionEvolvd

As you can see we have 34, so two Tournaments of 16 each and 2 alternates.. PERFECT..

Alternates will be chosen per sign up time...Only fair..

Semper

ATTENTION PLEASE

If you do not have FIGHTER Status, send me a U2U so that I may assign that to you.

Without Fighter Status you can not post in the Debate Forum..

Semper

reply to post by semperfortis


Sweet! Everyone is awesome; including me! Thanks for the list!
Keep us updated.

I have to apologize again folks..

Once again, I got that "call" I dread Sunday, another break in on a DHS Infrastructure site upstate..

5 hour drive and here I am...

I hope to conclude this investigation today however and head home tonight.. If all goes well, I will start back on this tomorrow..

Wish me luck..

Semper