Hindu Sammy: Debate, an explanation of the concept.

Submitted by Sword of Islam (United Kingdom), Mar 18, 2006 at 01:04

Submitted by Hind Samy, Mar 17, 2006 at 05:35
"Don't you get it? We've WON!! "
Won what? I didn't realise this was ever a contest? I thought it was a forum for people to discuss their differences freely?

- This further ignorance is an illuminating insight into why debates with people like you don't actually go anywhere. Maybe you're not as deceitful as you appear, after all!

As most of us understand it in the The West, a person who wishes to argue a point, ie the justification for the invasion of Iraq makes his POINT and supports it with FACTS.

The person, or persons, with who the individual is debating a topic makes a COUNTER-POINT and supports is with FACTS.

This cycle repeats itself until such time as the argument is either PROVEN (as in those points made by Sword or JustMe) or utterly DISCREDITED (as per those points made by Sarah or Wild Wild West - not you as you've yet to actually make a point)

The person whose ARGUMENT is proven can therefore be said to have WON the argument.

I hope that you can understand this concept. However, your ignorance is an illuminating insight as to why negotiations with countries in the Middle East never seem to go anywhere. Perhaps you could circulate this message to them?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".