Should you go to extremes in debates?

  • Thread starter Thread starter idiotninja
  • Start date Start date
Actually, it could be a good way of testing a premise. You have to take it to extremes to see if it makes sense. For instance, the debate over taxes. Do higher taxes create more economic activity or do low taxes? To find out, take them both to extreme levels and see what you get. If you raised taxes to 90% would people find even want to work anymore? If you lowered them to 10% would you see more or less economic activity?

By taking a premise to the extreme it is much easier to discover the advantages and disadvantages of it. Which is better Welfare or employment. Take them to extremes. What if everyone quit their job and went on Welfare? What if everyone quit Welfare and went to work? Which would be better?

*
 
debating with about99% of humainty is futile...debating with the dead, gets you nowhere. extinction is forever.
 
It's an extremily bad way of proving a point, because you create division in the audience as opposed to bringing forth people's opinions for discussion.

You can't get people to agree about anything if you're too busy antagonising them into what you think is right.
 
It all depends on what you are debating. But I would think the general rule is keep it as calm, controlled, and believable as possible and you'll be more likely to win.
 
Back
Top