How to Win a Facebook Debate

I really believe that social networks, of which Facebook certainly dominates, can be great sources of social change.

A place where consensus can be found to solve the many problems faced by people and planet.

However, all too often what I will herein denote as “Facebook debates” tend to devolve into childish insult trading among the comments of the parties on opposite sides of the issue under discussion.

That really doesn’t work.

I mean, what’s the real purpose of a debate?

Is it to demean your opponent?

Is it to make yourself appear more clever than your opponent?

I would say that the answer to those questions is NO, even though that tends to be the way we gauge the winners and losers of the televised political debates we’re accustomed to.

If you can just get that one-line zinger in that really causes your opponent to sweat a bit harder, like Bentsen did to Quayle back in 98, then we’ve got a winner.

I’m going to suggest a different tactic for how to win a Facebook debate, or any other, for that matter…

When I put forth a position in a debate, or a simple Facebook discussion, in the form of a solution to the issue at hand, or the problem posed, I then want to support my position in a way that causes the other side to accept or agree with it.

If I can do that, well, then I’ve won.

But what if the other side to the debate is so ideologically entrenched that getting him or her to agree on anything, even the most obvious point, seems impossible?

In that case, perhaps you can initiate the idea for some common ground that will move the other side closer to a mutually acceptable solution, idea, or position.

The purpose of the debate should be, even though it rarely is, to move forward towards a solution…

No?

Simply playing a game of one-upmanship doesn’t accomplish that.

I believe that’s why those political debates are worthless…

It’s never about solutions. It’s a media-driven show to prove one candidate the winner, not because of the higher quality of his ideas, but because he’s somehow able to demean the stature of the other fellow.

That might help you popularity-wise, and maybe even vote-wise, but it doesn’t move society forward one iota.

The same goes for these Facebook comment back and forth’s that all too often degenerate into “dissing” matches…

Now, granted, there are some out there who’ve perfected the art of the insult, or the offensive comeback. I don’t know who invented the term “libtard”, but it’s pretty clever, in a sophomoric way.

Being offensive doesn’t make you a good debater, nor does it prove that your ideas, if you actually possess any, have merit.

And it certainly doesn’t produce solutions…it just moves the parties further apart.

So, my suggestion is this, “can” the insults and show us your ideas…

Of course, complying will require an activity that perhaps we could all stand to engage in a bit more…

It’s called thinking.

If that was an insult…well, then I apologize.

I’m simply suggesting an alternative to the normally venomous political diatribes masquerading around social media under the guise of “debates.”

image credit: claireteat via Compfight cc