One of the things I've been surprised about on forums, and I wrote a post about this recently, is just how poor at debating many younger debaters are. They seem interested in debating but it's as if they have no idea how to debate. Debating isn't just arguing. It is an exchange of ideas in which both sides try to make the case for their position. Lawyers in court, in theory, debate. They dont' just yell back and forth "Did so!" "Did not!" for hours until the judge flogs them.

Highschools used to have debate classes. I don't know if they still do. I'm only 32 so I was young enough still to grow up with computers and BBSes and such. But today's young adults have had the Internet for most of their lives. You would think their skills would be sharper. They think that debates are pointless. Or that they're just arguments in which loud mouthed people trade epitephs back and forth. They're not. Debates offer a way for us to exchange ideas, thoughts, and opinions. They aren't there to "win" or "lose". They are there to make us think about things. I dont' want to pick purely on younger people, I see people of all ages trying to demonstrate their intellectual ineptitude to the world. But younger people tend to be the ones who take the most simplistic positions on issues and then insist that those who disagree with them are idiots or (my favorite) "ignorant".

Being good at debating isn't really that hard. There are basically 3 rules:

(1) Target subject matter that you have an interest in and have sufficient back ground knowledge. I don't know anything about, for instance, broadway musicals. So I wouldn't interject myself in a debate about the merits of one musical or another. Other subjects have a lot of material readily available. The most obvious one being history. People who haven't bothered to invest time reading history annoy those who have in debates because no one likes to have to sit down and do the leg work for some ignorant loud mouth. Go onto a World War II Usenet forum and you'll see a lot of aggravation as some neophyte comes in peddling either some Internet myth or some popular culture misconception. One common example are those people who think dropping the atomic bomb on Japan was an atrocity. These are people who have clearly not spent any time reading about the Pacific war. Trivia: Why was Hiroshima chosen to drop the atomic bomb? Because the air force had flattened nearly every other major city in Japan and there were only a few cities left. There are ample interviews of Hiroshima survivors and survivors of the various Toykya incidiary attacks to realize that the horror is pretty similar either way with the difference merely being the # of planes required to inflict it.

The point being: Pick subject matters you have invested some time to learn about. I have a long list of topics I'm in the process of researchig. I have an article on Halliburton. I know the basic facts for my article but I need to do more research on it. Yes, it takes work, but if you want to have a useful discussion and not just piss people off, you need to know the topic you're choosing to write an opinion piece on.

(2) Backup your assertions with evidence if the assertion isn't one that is commonly understood by others who are reasonably famliar with the subject. Also, be specific. Avoid vague generalities in your assertion. I.e. don't say "America is a bully." say "I think America is a bully because of the seeming arrogance displayed by this administration with its high handed treatment of the UN during the Iraq crisis. There doesn't seem to have been a compelling reason to attack Iraq when it did." I would disagree with that statement but it at least has enough meat to have a discussion about. By contrast, impression does the "America is a bully" give off? To me, it sounds pathetic and simpering. The words of someone jealous of American power and success.

(3) Offer alternatives. Nit-pickers quickly earn the contempt of other debaters. Who wants to deal with people who just sit around bitching about what other people have done. Offer an alternative action. Tell them what should have been done instead.

These 3 rules will help create better debates with people and accomplish what debating is really about -- thinking about things in new and interesting ways.

Have fun!