Are there any good debate style podcasts out there?

Author: Double_R

Posts

Total: 9
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,271
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
Curious to know what podcasts you guys listen to and if anyone has any good recommendations for a podcast that typically has people of opposing views discuss their differences. I've come across a lot of good conversations discussing religion, but rarely see good discussions about politics. It's one of the reasons I like to watch Bill Maher, he's one of the few that welcome opposing viewpoints and isn't afraid to challenge people. Was also a fan of Chris Cuomo interviews. Podcasts tend to be better for general discission, just haven't came across very many.

So any recommendations? Feel free to drop some links.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,715
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I used to watch Modern Debate, but not anymore. 

I am not interested in debating lately. Debating is boring.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Intelligence Squared takes on current issues with a small live audience.   Usually 2x2 Lincoln Douglas style.   The audience applies a numerical rating to their certainty on an issue before and after the debate and the winner is determined by which side shifted further.  They also do a pop debate series called VS- batman vs superman type subjects.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 269
Posts: 7,715
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@oromagi
 The audience applies a numerical rating to their certainty on an issue before and after the debate
Democracy vote dont correlates well with reasonable think.

57 days later

ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
I second oromagi. I listen to a lot of intelligence squared. They have the best system for determining a winner also. The criteria is how many people who you swayed to your position, which is probably the best measure to determine a winner.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,294
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ponikshiy
I would suggest that typically an audience has an unswayable majority and a thoughtful minority, so outcomes are more likely to decided by the make up of the audience, rather than swayability and thoughtfulness per se.

For example, if you debate against Islam, where the audience is 75% Muslim and 25% other, if you're lucky you will get a respectful round of applause, but you will never win.

Though this is a generalisation not taking into account certain other factors, such as the ability of debaters to communicate reasonably coherent arguments.


ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Prior to the debate you are asked if you are pro con or neutral and so if it is 

75% pro Islam

10 % neutral 

15% con Islam


And at the end of the debate it is

70% pro Islam

5% neutral 

25% con Islam

Tha. Despite most of the people there playing pro Islam, the pro Islam side loses because it persuaded less people
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,294
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ponikshiy
That's another way of doing it.

Though some people might frown at a system,  where 75% of the participants are ignored.

Wherein, more people were unpersuaded than were persuaded.
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
I am just telling g you how intelligence squared debates are scored and that I think it's a good way to judge debates.