How normal people argue

Author: Intelligence_06 ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 6
  • Intelligence_06
    Intelligence_06 avatar
    Debates: 33
    Forum posts: 1,079
    3
    6
    11
    Intelligence_06 avatar
    Intelligence_06
    As that I am a pretty chill person, I don’t start arguments unless the controversial topic greatly affects the world. The last time was a few months ago. I want know how normal people argue, as well as all these questions:

    What count as sources in a verbal debate, and how does its justification operate?

    Why that logic rarely works on normal arguments with people?

    Suppose you are a good debater on DART, then does that mean you will do better in verbal debating? Why or why not?

    Can you win against one person of your family in an ordinary argument? Why or why not?

    Why is that people often use Ad hominem as the dominant strategy in their arguments?
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,172
    4
    5
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    What count as sources in a verbal debate, and how does its justification operate?
    nothing, thats why its hard

    Why that logic rarely works on normal arguments with people?
    a lot of people dont get it

    Suppose you are a good debater on DART, then does that mean you will do better in verbal debating? Why or why not?
    i think being on dart would give you some advantage

    Can you win against one person of your family in an ordinary argument? Why or why not?

    yes but i wouldnt want to do that

    Why is that people often use Ad hominem as the dominant strategy in their arguments?
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,172
    4
    5
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @Intelligence_06
    forgot to tag you,post above
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 2,382
    3
    2
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @Intelligence_06
    What is normal, what is ordinary and is there a distinction to be made between a discussion and an argument?

    And ad-hominem is usually indicative of a shortage of relevant information, so at that point it's best to walk away with confidence. 
  • Lemming
    Lemming avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 103
    0
    1
    3
    Lemming avatar
    Lemming
    --> @Intelligence_06
    I don't know the answers to your questions.
    But you could probably find some users willing to get into verbal discussions/arguments online, with the express purpose of reviewing the debate afterward, perhaps by having a third party ask the two debaters 'separately their thoughts during certain parts of the debate, what their justifications were for why they responded with certain statements, or what emotions they might have felt.
    Which could be accomplished by either audio recording the debate, or taking notes.
  • seldiora
    seldiora avatar
    Debates: 56
    Forum posts: 51
    0
    1
    10
    seldiora avatar
    seldiora
    normal persons response

    What count as sources in a verbal debate, and how does its justification operate?

    news I guess

    Why that logic rarely works on normal arguments with people?

    emotion

    Suppose you are a good debater on DART, then does that mean you will do better in verbal debating? Why or why not?

    depends, you might get caught up in stuff

    Can you win against one person of your family in an ordinary argument? Why or why not?

    not my mom, I get too reckless and dumb

    Why is that people often use Ad hominem as the dominant strategy in their arguments?

    it works