i hate when debate pieces are presented. It's such bullshit. Just let me talk about the two sides and then fuck off. You don't need me to explain to you how to think about something. You have a brain, i put ALL the shit you could ever possibly want right in front of you and now you decide "oh no i need you to tell me how to think, i no rember, it hard" Fuck you.

don't get me wrong, i enjoy researching and writing them. But fucking hell, you don't have to have an opinion about every little fucking thing to exist.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I think you're right up to a point. I disagree about teaching people how to think. I credit a particular lesson in early high-school in a media studies class with giving me the framework to critically consider the media I consume and the headlines / viewpoints I read.

Whether debate is the best format for that, I dunno. But I do think teaching kids how to think critically is valuable.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

teaching people how to think is a good thing, my complaint there was that i shouldn't need to write a book on politics, to then be required to explain to someone why one side bad and other side good, because i wrote an entire fucking book about it, and you should be able to gather what my opinion is from that, and then form your own as well.

If my entire written text doesn't make it clear what i've laid out, you probably shouldn't be reading im just going to be honest.

[–] LwL@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I once failed a test in politics class because after examining both sides I stated this issue does not affect me and I can see merit in both positions, therefore I do not have an opinion on the correct course of action.

Not like the grade mattered in the slightest but that was actual bullshit.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 months ago

that is some fierce bullshit, especially if you laid out a pretty comprehensive examination of both sides.

[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I use the inverse of this strategy; whenever I figure out that I'm wrong about something, I immediately admit I was mistaken and change my position. All I have to do is make sure my logic is impeccable and I'll almost always win an argument.

[–] kakes@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 months ago

No you won't.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

In the situation I'm talking about, you could simply choose to argue for the correct side (as most did). You're usually given a choice between 2 options. Or at least, I was in high school, and to be fair my school sucked. I saw the exercise like a game and I was picking hard difficulty. I didn't actually believe in the position I took. It was just more interesting to argue for.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Oh man it takes me so much longer to figure out when I'm wrong about something. And it's never on the spot - more often while showering or driving.

[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's a skill. The better you are at logic and the more you interrogate your philosophical foundations, the more of a leg-up you have. I got lucky by being born as a stereotypically logical autistic person and growing up as an incredibly introspective child. Thinking a lot about why you think what you do, what you might be wrong about, and planning out the kinds of responses that you should have if you get new information really help. It also helps to have a profoundly strong belief that you are able to change your mind easily; simply believing that makes it more likely to be true.