rationalskepticism.org

Rumraket wrote:Here's the problem as I see it: You have some sort of expectation that an argument should end with one part making some sort of concession speech.

That almost never ever happens. And by almost never I mean that I'm actually not aware of a debate that happened that concluded with one side ending up conceding to the other right then and there. I have a pretty strong suspicion this never took place in actual history.

You might actually change another person's mind, but s/he's not generally going to sit there and admit to you that this has happened. At best, in the rare cases where people change their minds, what happens during a debate is that it stops the way it always does, with both parties walking away from it thinking the other person is an idiot.

And then when they are away from it and they have calmed down and have taken their minds off it and theyr'e in the shower, or doing the dishes, the arguments and the evidence will start to weigh in and make people think. Then, in the quiet of their own heads, they might change their minds.

But you personally will never get to see this happen real time. It happens in the privacy of people's heads, and maybe, just maybe, many years later you'll hear from the person's mind you changed. But don't count on it. You do these debate to put the ideas and information into a place where they didn't before. That's it. And then you can just hope that someone who reads it at some point thinks about it.

Do not EVER go into a debate in order to SEE people change their minds. If that is your debating goal, you will fail ALL debates you ever have, because the goal you have set for yourself is UNATTAINABLE given human nature. It simply isn't how the nuclear-ape works. So let go of that desire. Just keep informing for it's own sake, don't do it because you want to enjoy the spectacle of a concession speech, they are total fantasies.