Debatable Dangers

Democracy is a complicated thing, as are all things human. As an ideal it has fueled many discussions and as a reality it is the cultural platform on which these discussions take place; "discussions" are indeed at the very heart of democracy, which is why freedom of expression has such a pivotal role.

_{source: Needpix.com}

This is why the "public debate" has gained such popularity and significance in the eyes of so many that participate in the democracies of the 21st century; are we not all the co-authors of each others opinions, the co-creators of the lively "marketplace of ideas" that is the hallmark of any democratically run society? I believe we are. But I also believe that the public debate has to be approached with great care, and that we should be careful to not mistake these debates for serious discussions with the aim of seeking truth or conveying facts. A debate is not an open and honest exchange of ideas, not an arena in which the best ideas prevail, but one in which the best debater prevails.

The danger lies here: far too often "winning the debate" translates into support for the ideas brought forward by the winner of the debate. Any professional debater will tell you that winning or losing a debate has absolutely nothing to do with the veracity of the points proposed by either side. Yet this is how the result is weighed by much of the audience; the ideas brought forward by the winner must be the correct ideas, especially when the opponent comes across as uncertain, or is made to look silly by a much more articulate and confident opponent. This phenomenon is best exemplified, in my opinion, by members of the so called "dark web", Ben Shapiro in particular who has built a career on "destroying" unsuspecting students in settings where he has a clear advantage.

In political debate this is even worse; you'll never hear a politician say in the middle of a debate: "That's a good point, I must reconsider and take that into account... You just may have changed my opinion!" This can not happen if the politician cares at all about their chances of winning over the support of onlookers; such an admission will be seen as a sign of weakness and lack of conviction by most, instead of as a sign of strength, honesty and character. I found this video of a young lady, Sarah Z, who has participated in and won many debate-contests; she does a much better job than I can exploring and explaining this topic:

_{Why Debating Sucks (According To A Competitive Debater)}

---

Thanks so much for visiting my blog and reading my posts dear reader, I appreciate that a lot :-) If you like my content, please consider leaving a comment, upvote or resteem. I'll be back here tomorrow and sincerely hope you'll join me. Until then, keep steeming!

Recent articles you might be interested in:

Latest article >>>>>>>>>>>	It's The Best We Can Do
Separating The Hemispheres	Dune And The Thinking Machines
HyperNormalisation	Dune And The Pleasure Of Not Knowing
Social Justice Limited	Prosperity Gospel

Thanks for stopping by and reading. If you really liked this content, if you disagree (or if you do agree), please leave a comment. Of course, upvotes, follows, resteems are all greatly appreciated, but nothing brings me and you more growth than sharing our ideas. It's what Steemit is made for!

I am a proud helpinaut! @Helpie is looking for new members! Helpie has been growing nicely and we are always on the lookout for new valuable members. We are very supportive and community oriented. If you would like to be scouted for @helpie , please drop a comment on THIS POST or contact @paintingangels on discord at paintingangels(serena)#3668.

Just for Full Disclosure, I'm invested in these crypto-currencies:

Bitcoin | Litecoin | EOS | OmiseGo | FunFair | KIN | Pillar | DENT | Polymath | XDCE | 0x | Decred | Ethereum | Carmel | XYO



@helpie is a WITNESS now! So please help @helpie help you by voting for us here!