Steve
Mostly Harmless
The goal of this exercise is to clearly articulate a persuasive argument (logical argument; not angry argument) on a controversial topic that is the the opposite of the position you identify with the most. I expect that the more entrenched you are with one side or the other, the more radical a departure this will seem to you. But, it's a common exercise in debate and, in my opinion, it's very informative and can make you aware of some blind spots you might have.
I am open to any proposed topic, but suggest we pick one and stick with it for this thread. To be clear, the intent of the exercise is that you research your new position and debate as passionately in favor of it as you would normally.
I'll also recommend that you consider the difference between arguing against a position and arguing in favor of a position. Both can be effective, but they are different. If you get stuck working one tactic, it can be helpful to try another.
Also, since we're talking about debate, it's okay to use logical fallacies, but be mindful that they are seldom as effective as a cogent, logical argument with conclusions that are built upon sound premises.
So, is anyone game to try this? Anyone have any ideas for a first topic?
I am open to any proposed topic, but suggest we pick one and stick with it for this thread. To be clear, the intent of the exercise is that you research your new position and debate as passionately in favor of it as you would normally.
I'll also recommend that you consider the difference between arguing against a position and arguing in favor of a position. Both can be effective, but they are different. If you get stuck working one tactic, it can be helpful to try another.
Also, since we're talking about debate, it's okay to use logical fallacies, but be mindful that they are seldom as effective as a cogent, logical argument with conclusions that are built upon sound premises.
So, is anyone game to try this? Anyone have any ideas for a first topic?