-
Do you think the opponent's arguments will help improve your worldview? If so, the argument is useful.
-
Is your opponent open to changing their view, and will your arguments help that? If so, the argument is useful.
-
Is this an effective use of your time reaching other people compared to e.g. posting/commenting your arguments elsewhere? If so, the argument is useful.
Otherwise, the argument is not useful and you should consider doing something else.
10 Comments
Broadfern@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 141d
1000009% agree.
Good faith, nuanced discussion >>>> engaging with a hostile βdebateβ
otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 139d
Well, that's not how percentages work at all. π
p4rzivalrp2@piefed.social · 0 pts · 138d
But is that a valuable debate? π€
otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 137d
Are you?
p4rzivalrp2@piefed.social · 1 pts · 137d
Is anything? π€π€π€
otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 137d
Is?
MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 136d
?
otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 135d
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 138d
Sometimes you argue so a third person sees people pushing back. Being performative is sometimes the point.
MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 138d
Yeah, that makes sense and I tried to cover it with Point 3.