Debate Like an Adult

Let us all take a moment to discuss debating as an adult.  If you are a grown up, you should be able to debate as such.  Debating as an adult means presenting facts that you are able to back up with clear-cut evidence from a reliable source.  This is one of the reasons that debating religion can be difficult.  While there is valid historical evidence to back up, let's say, the existence of some Biblical figures or situations, there is not necessarily evidence to back up the miracles described.  That is where the validity of "faith" comes in.  Faith is believing in something that you cannot see; thus, belief in the Bible is based partly on what history proves occurs and partly on believing in a higher power (God) and His ability to provide miracles.  But I digress....

If you can provide clear cut actual scientific evidence (not theory, not guessing) including but not limited to extensive studies done by reliable sources and/or photography, then you have what can be factually referred to as "proof."  Proof is defined as "evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement".  The adjective form of proof is defined as "able to withstand something damaging; resistant."  I believe both need to apply in a debate situation.  Proof as evidence or argument establishes a FACT.  It doesn't mean that you are inputting your opinion into it.  It doesn't mean that because you believe a certain way, your biased opinion weighs on the topic.  It means that what is established as proven is FACT.  You can dislike it.  You can be opposed to it.  You can want it to be something else.  What is established as proven is FACT.

Proof in its adjective form, though, is also necessary in a debate.  If your argument is not able to withstand something damaging, it is going to be a losing argument.  If you don't have evidence to support your argument, it will withstand nothing.  If your evidence cannot be researched and found without fault, it will withstand nothing.  In short, if you can look it up on snopes.com and find what is posted, written, etc to be false, you are wasting your time in trying to debate the issue.  It must be able to withstand someone else looking into your fact and showing that it is worthy of merit. (And before you start in on the topic of whether or not snopes.com is valid, you must realize that once you turn your argument into this topic, you are completely voiding your original debate and beginning a new one.)

An adult debate requires that you provide evidence to support your position.  If your evidence is invalid, your argument becomes invalid too.  You can't say that just because something "looks right to you" or is "similar to the truth" that it is the truth.  This is particularly true when you are discussing photographic evidence.  If you are basing your argument on inaccurate depictions of any kind, your perspective is to fact what the National Enquirer is to news.  It's inaccurate and won't be taken seriously.  Period.  If you want to make your argument stronger, find evidence that can be looked up, backed up and shown to be factual....evidence that can be proven.

Now let's cover responses to debate.  When someone presents you actual fact that can be backed up, proven and feet to the fire shown to be true and your response is to tell them that your debate is "close enough", you are essentially completely forfeiting your argument.  You have now turned an adult debate into a children's persuasion piece.  A good portion of the time, the response by someone who has just been proven wrong (and who can't participate in an adult debate) is to name call, launch personal attacks, demoralize by making it seem like the other party just simply doesn't know as much or to make it into a victim situation (as if you are attacking them by providing facts on the matter).  If you have to use one of these responses, you are not presenting a strong debate.  You're acting like a know it all.  It doesn't make you educated to present false evidence and then get angry, hurt, or frustrated when someone proves you wrong.  In fact, it presents the exact opposite image of what you're trying to present.  If you are trying to sway someone to agree with you, you will not achieve this in this manner.

All too often, those that are trying to "educate" people or persuade them to pick a side (particularly in political and social issues) seem to not be able to strongly debate their cause.  When their debate starts to fail, they blame everyone else but themselves.  Many of these people are very opinionated and seem to believe that if they read information from one or two sources that support their opinion, they are the most educated on the topic.  Anyone that believes something different is dumb, a jerk or a million other adjectives that don't apply.  It seems to be an epidemic with the upcoming elections and it's bordering on absurd.

So allow me to close with the following: If you are unable to debate in an adult manner, do the world and favor and just avoid debates at all.  If your "evidence" is that you had a cousin's uncle Remus that told you that, fine. If you want to play victim, super.  Just remember that you are doing nothing for your argument and therefore, driving people further from your cause.  Do yourself a favor and educate yourself fully with a debate that allows you to truly stand up for your cause and will withstand the other side's research.  You will move mountains for your passions when you debate like an adult.