Exactly. Debate is an academic exercise and hardly anyone is ever swayed to change their mind based on one. That's why academic debate has so many rules - because almost every "fallacy" that breaks those rules is actually emotionally persuasive.
Yeah, The only time those style of debates really matter is when audience members don't have firm opinions yet.
Eta well matter for changing people's minds. There is value in learning to think critically imho but we're a dumb animal and the vast majority of us don't change our opinions based on superior evidence
The issue is that there is no impartial arbiter. Fact checking is seen by one side as an attack and an insult instead of identifying blatant intent to defraud their voters and the American people. It's been turned into competitive theater with teams and what is supposed to be for informational purposes has been turned into Ancient Aliens and Honey Boo Boo.
It's basically a content generating device to keep a hype train going and that is what I find so irritating is that is what the "bad condidate" argument boils down to. They claim there was no platform when there damn well sure was. What they are really doing is the work of the other hype team to drag down the only viable alternative to the lying criminal who will definitely hurt people on purpose for profit and fun.
27
u/Squid_of_the_Now 1d ago
Exactly. Debate is an academic exercise and hardly anyone is ever swayed to change their mind based on one. That's why academic debate has so many rules - because almost every "fallacy" that breaks those rules is actually emotionally persuasive.