Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

So what do you think is a good debate, and what do you feel are the best techniques one can use. Also how do you feel about etiquette.

With regards to etiquette, i think a good debator shows their opponent respect and avoids condescension and personal insults.

As for good techniques, i think a good way is to state your position firmly, clearly and specifically. This makes it more difficult for your opponent to straw man you, as you left out any ambiguity or wiggle room in your argument.

What about the rest of you.

It's telling that you cannot adequately debate me without resorting to baseless neckbeard and MLP insults. You normalfags are all the same, have fun with your little circlejerk safe haven that is Serious Debate. If you need me, I shall be in Riff-Raff actually contributing to the canon of human knowledge. Good day, sir.

Anything that doesn't devolve into personal attacks on the other guy is usually a good sign.

That, and the ability to respect someones opinion if it doesn't conform with your beliefs, and not trying to force your opinion on someone else, is usually the right way to go about such things. Idk, I guess just don't be a dick?

Proper debate etiquette involves keeping your speeches to about 3-5 minutes in length. Proper life etiquette involves understanding that not every discussion is a debate.

Well, in terms of real life, the best approach is to always sit up straight, look someone in the eye to make sure they understand they have your attention, and overall upholding a very civil and… what was the word for it… right! A civil and upstanding atmosphere.
In terms of debate in general, you have to keep your temper and emotion in check. Not only will letting lose make you look like a buffoon, it'll also destroy any credibility you have. If you want people to take you seriously, then make sure you don't sound condescending or arrogant, and be humble toward counterpoints. They might make you think in an angle you haven't thought of.
In terms of internet debate, literally just follow what Bitter Brit said; don't be a dick and never resort to insults unless you want to look like a total ass.

Phase 1. All parties take turns expressing their beliefs on the issue with any relevant information. No questions are asked.

Phase 2. Parties take turns asking questions about the other's specific view points on the issue. Bringing up clarification issues, external influences that may have an effect on their positions and attempting to enforce their own position.

Phase 3. All parties then end with their closing statements about their positions, any changes in opinions they may have had, and offering possible solutions to the problem.

There should be no intellectually dishonest fallacies used (No-True-Scottsman for example). No personal insults being thrown. Parties should not interrupt each other and should get Equal Time. Off topic discussions should be kept out of the issue. My greatest hated method of attack in bad debates is what I like to call the "Definition Fallacy".

The Definition Fallacy is the idea that just because a word carries a specific meaning that means no matter what outside influence happens that word carries that specific meaning with no possible way to change.

This shows up a lot in feminism where when you start to criticize the movement they don't try to debate but instead just point to the definition of feminism in the dictionary as a way to silence opponents. This implies that because feminism is defined as "The movement for equality between men and women" that any action the group takes can ONLY be for "equality".

I've also seen religious people do this in debates while trying to call up specific definitions of "Evolution" or "Faith" and using those instead of the generally accepted definitions for them because it better helps their argument.

Try to explain your reasoning and go in depth on your PoV.