Spiral Stages of Debating

[Parththakkar12]

I have a picture for what kinds of debates would occur at which Spiral Stages:

• Red - Overt name-calling, a proper food-fight with name-calling in it. You can picture an argument with both sides angrily yelling names at each other and that situation is all set to escalate physically. Who wins? The side who can talk faster and louder, the side who knows more names than the other, the side who can use the most brute-force. That side wins! A 'win' would be the win of the food-fight itself! Not an intellectual win.
• Blue - It's a debate between good and bad, right and wrong. Is this thing good or bad? Is that thing right or wrong? For vs against. Who wins? The side who is morally superior to the other. There will still be plenty of demonization on both sides but at least it'll be according to a morality that isn't set by them, that's set by a third-party. A 'win' would be a moral victory. Not an intellectual win.
• Orange - It's a technical, hard-nosed debate in which scientific studies and statistics get thrown around. Who wins? The one with the credentials wins, the one with more evidence wins.
• Green - It's less of a debate and more of everyone sharing their 'equally valid', politically correct perspectives. No claims on absolute truth because that would offend all the other perspectives. Who wins? The one with the most all-inclusive, all-encompassing perspective, most PC perspective.

At which spiral-stage would it be possible to construct a debate-situation in which the side with the truth actually wins? Is it even possible to do that?

[Carl-Richard]

Red - no debate; war.

Blue - no debate; dogma.

Orange - no debate; "debate".

Green - no debate; opinions.

Yellow - no debate; conversation.

Turquoise - no debate.

[Opo]

12 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Orange - no debate; "debate".

What do you mean by this? 

[Carl-Richard]

6 minutes ago, Opo said:

What do you mean by this? 

What Orange calls debate is a caricature of the potential of what debate could be.

[Opo]

18 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

What Orange calls debate is a caricature of the potential of what debate could be.

One day I'll find the name of it. 

[Consept]

1 hour ago, Parththakkar12 said:

Green - It's less of a debate and more of everyone sharing their 'equally valid', politically correct perspectives. No claims on absolute truth because that would offend all the other perspectives. Who wins? The one with the most all-inclusive, all-encompassing perspective, most PC perspective

I would disagree with green, it maybe true if they're debating those with similar beliefs or those that are fairly open minded. But if they're debating someone at a lower stage who disagrees with them they can get into moral superiority and judgement, name calling etc. Debates about veganism can get crazy, also dont forget a lot of green people got into maga and conspiracy theories. Point is they're still arguing from a position of my view is the correct one and all others are at best wrong and at worst evil 

[Village]

2 hours ago, Parththakkar12 said:

Green - It's less of a debate and more of everyone sharing their 'equally valid', politically correct perspectives.

"Equally valid" as long as you have the same political opinion, you mean.

[Woke456]

Almost all moderators on the internet are poor and pro-marxist because they put all their energy into activism instead of things people will pay them to do.  So banning is what happens when Green is smitten in a debate.

[Matt23]

I feel like the debate would also be taking place on a more subtle level too.  A level that's not about the content being discussed necessarily, but about "how" the debate is taking place and being framed.  Like a subtle debate about the values that are being prioritized, focused on, and displayed during the debate.  I think this is where most of the triggering would happen between stages.  

[lmfao]

@Parththakkar12 @Carl-Richard Good post.

On 25/05/2021 at 11:21 PM, Carl-Richard said:

Blue - no debate; dogma.

If two blue people share the same ideology and are in the same group as each other, their "debates" will often consist of the quoting and referencing of ideological literature. It's a pretty straightforward circle jerk. "The invisible man in the sky likes it when you hug children" "No, the invisible man likes it when you slap them"
THERE IS NO INVISIBLE MAN.

But if we're talking about blue people who come from different ideologies, why nothing will happen really. The two people will talk past each other as they regurgitate dogma. "I explain to you why I think my culture is best, you explain to me why you think yours is". 

On 25/05/2021 at 11:21 PM, Carl-Richard said:

Orange - no debate; "debate".

Orange is annoying. The error in their ways is very contextual/attitude orientated, hence you can't communicate to the other person with words that they're as thick as a brick.

Midwits and high IQ peeps with large egos, basically impenetrable to talk to. At worst these folks are extremely high strung, walking on eggshells around someone who's looking for an excuse to rape you with their intellect. 

Orange is so annoyingly stiff and slow at discussing things. The two debaters enter a 2 hour long detour discussing strictly logical semantics that arose 2 minutes into the debate before anything of substance of said.

I just want to whack them on the head {for being so blatantly inconvenient to me} for being so retarded and slow. It's like watching someone bang their head against a wall and demand that you do too as the PREREQUISITES for this conversation. 

On 25/05/2021 at 11:21 PM, Carl-Richard said:

Red - no debate; war.

You're just mad that I get more bitches than you. 

Edited May 27, 2021 by lmfao

[Opo]

On 26/05/2021 at 0:44 AM, Carl-Richard said:

What Orange calls debate is a caricature of the potential of what debate could be.

Do you mean this? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic

 

[Blackhawk]

Nice "debate" between a alien skeptic and a alien nut: 

 

[Arcangelo]

So tier 2 people don't debate?

They can debate but they choose not to?