Shouting down opinions, throwing toys out of the pram style debating

steddyeddy

A hobby of mine is attending debates in college. Some interesting topics are have been discussed but in recent years it seems to me the style of debating has changed in recent years from engaging with those who disagree to shouting down opponents and throwing the toys out of the pram style debating. Another one that crops up now and again is "I'm out" or ending an argument when the other side disagree. Are we teaching young people to engage with the issues or is it now more popular to shout down opinions of people who don't agree with you?

darkpagandeath

Special snowflake syndrome.

LeinsterDub

steddyeddy wrote: »

. Are we teaching young people to engage with the issues or is it now more popular to shout down opinions of people who don't agree with you?

People have always shouted down people when the either can't win the debate by other means or are personally offended. This has happened since the dawn of time it certainly isn't a new phenomenon

RedemptionZ

"I find this offensive" mindset has basically taken over in colleges. Guest speakers boycotted because they have different beliefs, rather than engage in debates they would rather either not give the other side a platform to give their opinions or alternatively simply shout abuse at them.

The Sidewards Man

The lack of a link is the new winner in a debate.

steddyeddy

RedemptionZ wrote: »

"I find this offensive" mindset has basically taken over in colleges. Guest speakers boycotted because they have different beliefs, rather than engage in debates they would rather either not give the other side a platform to give their opinions or alternatively simply shout abuse at them.

I never understood this argument. By shouting down people you disagree with you're exhibiting an inability to counter their argument.

Barry Badrinath

The Sidewards Man wrote: »

The lack of a link is the new winner in a debate.

Have you a link to back that up?

darkpagandeath

RedemptionZ wrote: »

"I find this offensive" mindset has basically taken over in colleges. Guest speakers boycotted because they have different beliefs, rather than engage in debates they would rather either not give the other side a platform to give their opinions or alternatively simply shout abuse at them.

Coupled with a heavy dose of "I have the right to be offended" and their offence is the priority.

The Backwards Man

The Sidewards Man wrote: »

The lack of a link is the new winner in a debate.

If you're going to state something as fact you should be able to back it up. Otherwise you're just another crank spouting rubbish.

RayM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Another one that crops up now and again is "I'm out" or ending an argument when the other side disagree.

That can often be the best thing to do. If neither side are likely to change their minds, continuing to argue after you've said everything you want to say is an awful waste of time and energy.

Richard Hillman

RedemptionZ wrote: »

"I find this offensive" mindset has basically taken over in colleges. Guest speakers boycotted because they have different beliefs, rather than engage in debates they would rather either not give the other side a platform to give their opinions or alternatively simply shout abuse at them.

And record it on video. It doesn't count unless its recorded

bnt

The term that I like is Generation Snowflake:

There is no mystery to the absurdities of the Stepford Student. Nor should we wonder at their sudden appearance. We — adult society — protect children from criticism and suspend our critical judgment in order to massage their self-esteem. We scare them rigid by ‘catastrophising’ an endless list of fears. We make them hypervigilant about potential abuse from adults and their peers. We encourage them to equate abusive words with physical violence. And we have, in short, shaped our own overanxious, easily offended, censoriously thin-skinned Frankenstein monster. We created Generation Snowflake.

Like this beaut...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aKld4TPFhE

steddyeddy

Deleted User wrote: »

Like this beaut...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aKld4TPFhE

Jesus......... I've seen similar in the UK TBH.

RayM

RayM wrote: »

That can often be the best thing to do. If neither side are likely to change their minds, continuing to argue after you've said everything you want to say is an awful waste of time and energy.

There's only so much arguing you can do with a Neo-Nazi, for example.

If the other side is so entrenched they can't do anything other than repeat their soundbites ad nauseum, the only sensible thing to do is leave them to it.

Jack Killian

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Coupled with a heavy dose of "I have the right to be offended" and their offence is the priority.

There's often a reason the phrase is "take offence"

Sleeper12

steddyeddy wrote:

A hobby of mine is attending debates in college. Some interesting topics are have been discussed but in recent years it seems to me the style of debating has changed in recent years from engaging with those who disagree to shouting down opponents and throwing the toys out of the pram style debating. Another one that crops up now and again is "I'm out" or ending an argument when the other side disagree. Are we teaching young people to engage with the issues or is it now more popular to shout down opinions of people who don't agree with you?

Don't you see the same thing here on boards everyday?

steddyeddy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Don't you see the same thing here on boards everyday?

Yea you do worryingly.

Snake Plisken

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Like this beaut...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aKld4TPFhE

Scumbag pro Hamas Palestine animal he should be thrown out of the Uni big man with such a big vocabulary f this F off f out twat!

RayM

Candie wrote: »

There's only so much arguing you can do with a Neo-Nazi, for example.

If the other side is so entrenched they can't do anything other than repeat their soundbites ad nauseam, the only sensible thing to do is leave them to it.

Exactly. I think people can be afraid to walk away from an argument because of the perception that if you allow the other person to have the last word, you automatically 'lose', however extreme and unreasonable their arguments are. This is why so many 'debates' on Boards are 20 or 30 pages long.

If you walk away and make a cup of tea, have an ice cream or watch something on Netflix, leaving the other person angrily hammering away at their keyboard, you've won.

RayM

RayM wrote: »

Exactly. I think people can be afraid to walk away from an argument because of the perception that if you allow the other person to have the last word, you automatically 'lose', however extreme and unreasonable their arguments are. This is why so many 'debates' on Boards are 20 or 30 pages long.

If you walk away and make a cup of tea, have an ice cream or watch something on Netflix, leaving the other person angrily hammering away at their keyboard, you've won.

Once the multiquote mararthon starts, I have no problem bowing out. Nothing new comes from the tedious micro examination of the same old, same old. It's just iteration after iteration ad nauseum.

Snake Plisken

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Scumbag pro Hamas Palestine animal he should be thrown out of the Uni big man with such a big vocabulary f this F off f out twat!

The amusing thing was, in the middle of his rant, going on about his 10 years on campus. He thought it was a boast!

Severard

Candie wrote: »

There's only so much arguing you can do with a Neo-Nazi, for example.

If the other side is so entrenched they can't do anything other than repeat their soundbites ad nauseum, the only sensible thing to do is leave them to it.

Yeah there is only so much one can take before they bow out of a "debate" with someone that won't listen to the other side.

Yet I rarely do it right away once it is obvious that the other person doesn't want to engage with you. Continuing the conversation with them will show others that they don't have anything of substance to put forward. Trying to debate with people on the extreme right or the extreme left never materialises into anything of worth but for showing them to be the mindless prats that they are.

edbrez

Deleted User wrote: »

The amusing thing was, in the middle of his rant, going on about his 10 years on campus. He thought it was a boast!

How many exams did he fail?

Capt'n Midnight

How can people learn to debate nowadays ?

Back in the day it used to be , pick a controversial topic and then randomly choose the sides. So very often people would be debating against their own personal views. But it meant they had to be prepared to see issues from a new side, it meant they had to play the Devil's Advocate, it meant they had to step out of their comfort zone.

The role of third level should be to prepare people somewhat for adulthood.
And adulthood means being a wage slave and having to suck it up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUcIcxi5QGw

Fratton Fred

steddyeddy wrote: »

A hobby of mine is attending debates in college. Some interesting topics are have been discussed but in recent years it seems to me the style of debating has changed in recent years from engaging with those who disagree to shouting down opponents and throwing the toys out of the pram style debating. Another one that crops up now and again is "I'm out" or ending an argument when the other side disagree. Are we teaching young people to engage with the issues or is it now more popular to shout down opinions of people who don't agree with you?

You're a mass- debater?

steddyeddy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You're a mass- debater?

That's it I'm OUT!!!

CrabRevolution

Some fine convincing oratory about 40 seconds in.