[quote name='Kafuuka' date='28 February 2010 - 07:56 AM' timestamp='1267361811' post='55476']
Debates have always been a part of MD and I thought it was once again time to talk about argumentation.
Suppose you have two people (or groups of people) A and B who are each supporting one thesis. In the following examples, who do you think is 'winning', if any?
1. A gives 1 argument and B does nothing.
2. A gives 2 arguments and B gives 1.
3. A gives 2 arguments and B refutes one.
4. A gives 2 arguments and B refutes both.
5. A gives 2 arguments and B refutes both and gives 1 argument of his own.
Feel free to ponder why exactly I'm asking this.
[/quote]
1. A is "winning" because B cannot counteract said point whether it being perfectly valid, or just something that is beyond B's understanding/knowledge.
2. This would depend on the arguments used, wherein B could have used a more valid argument, while A's arguments were more just BS. Either could be "winning".
3. A is "winning" because even though B is able to refute one argument, he is back to 1. because it might be beyond B's understanding/knowledge.
4. Neither is winning and they are both at a stalemate. B might be ahead by a bit because the way I see it, if he was able to shoot down the arguments of A, then B is being more successful. How long that will last however is deemed uncertain.
5. This would be the better outcome to 4 (in B's case anyways), and B would be "winning" at this point due to B shutting down A's arguments, and making a claim/argument of his own to which A has to respond to.
Now, this is purely on a "as far I see it" plane of thought, and winning to me would be successfully counteracting the opponent, and making valid claims of your own that your opponent cannot refute. As for another way of looking at it, debates are usually beneficial to both parties, by the fact that it allows the other party to see the topic in another Point of View, and it allows for constant exchanging of knowledge. Eg. If you get defeated in a debate, you have won, if you now use the opportunity to research further, so you can debate it further next time, and then have an arsenal of facts against that certain top, knowing that if they use an argument, you now have a defense against it. Or, you might even see that your point of view was not as correct as you might have thought, and you might go to the other side. In which case, the side that successfully "converted you" would be seen as the winner, but you are also, since you now are more content on the side you are now on. I would really love to hear your thoughts on this. I love debates