What are the prerequisites of a good debater?

countryboy

Traditionally Progressive
Nov 30, 2009
3,686
39
48
BC
Can we hone our debating skills for 2010?

I'm usually a bit of an optimist but in this case, the glass may be half-empty.

Can you be more specific on "debating skills?" I'm looking at that through my own eyes (covered with rose-colored glasses, as usual) but I'm guessing you might be talking about trying to be a bit more objective, or dare I say, nice during these debates? :-?
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
I'm usually a bit of an optimist but in this case, the glass may be half-empty.

Can you be more specific on "debating skills?" I'm looking at that through my own eyes (covered with rose-colored glasses, as usual) but I'm guessing you might be talking about trying to be a bit more objective, or dare I say, nice during these debates? :-?

I don't really know, not considering myself to be a particularly good debater, if there is someone you consider to be an expert debater on the forum maybe try going there.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
I think the ability to claim that what you've said is not what you've said, while claiming that you always say what you mean, is paramount. That, mixed with a healthy does of patronizing and mis-placed egotism.
 

countryboy

Traditionally Progressive
Nov 30, 2009
3,686
39
48
BC
I think the ability to claim that what you've said is not what you've said, while claiming that you always say what you mean, is paramount. That, mixed with a healthy does of patronizing and mis-placed egotism.

Are we talking politics or debating? (Or is there a difference?)
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
I think the ability to claim that what you've said is not what you've said, while claiming that you always say what you mean, is paramount. That, mixed with a healthy does of patronizing and mis-placed egotism.

I have a little problem with that in that I think a good debater should be an honest debater.
 

countryboy

Traditionally Progressive
Nov 30, 2009
3,686
39
48
BC
I have a little problem with that in that I think a good debater should be an honest debater.

Honestly, this is getting trickier by the minute! OK, let's see, do you mean that a good debate should include a person expressing their true feelings about a particular subject? Or, do you mean the facts presented must be true? :roll:
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
Honestly, this is getting trickier by the minute! OK, let's see, do you mean that a good debate should include a person expressing their true feelings about a particular subject? Or, do you mean the facts presented must be true? :roll:

That's good, perhaps if we are to define a good debater we have to establish all the parameters. "Facts" being "true" goes without saying...............in my books :lol::lol::lol:
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
Quite so, JLM, however, we'll need more than anecdotal evidence to back you up on that.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
good opinions, which are not quite factual make a good
debate, as both sides strive to find the truth of the matter together, with different views, the best ingredient
being the one who finally realizes he/she is wrong must admit 'that fact'.

Also a good debate can end on a friendly note, with both
sides still holding their original opinions, because there
is no factual answer, just a point of view.

We need to respect the other opinion, even though it is not
ours, and those opinions that are obviously unbelievable
and insane must be gently dismissed and finally ignored.

The above seems so logical and proper, but boring,so we must add some
character to these debates for entertainment purposes, that
would bring in the personalities of each debator without
battling for power.