Does debate change minds?

Have you ever changed your mind on some philosophical or political topic as a direct result of a debate?

Pic basically unrelated

Studies show that no, it doesn't. According to the same study, the best way to "change someone's mind" is to ridicule them. Poke fun at their beliefs. Laugh at what they think is true. Eventually they realize the futility of it all. They either give in to the masses or start ridiculing their own selves in defense

Yes but not always on the spot, for important things I often had to think about it more a while before letting go my of disproved opinions.
For little facts it's easy to change my mind on the spot during a debate.
But most of the time I don't change my mind because I'm not a low iq faggot and if I have an opinion I already thought about it long enough and I already know the arguments against it.

Truly normies are inferior

Yes, but not often. A foundation for change usually happens when radical new(hidden/assumptions not agreed upon) information enters a phase of argument.

I don't know if pure debate does anything, however I believe a foundation needs to be laid in order to truly change someone's mind. So in a debate, a person needs to thoroughly make a foundation for their position for another person to agree upon. However in-order to do that first, the recipient must have some sort of rationality (to digest the argument) and humility to humble their own arrogance and intelligence to understand they are not perfect. A good way I've adopted is to seek out contrary opinions in a meaningful fashion as they are more valuable to me than generally agreed upon stuff. I don't need confirmation, I need contradictions if I am to grow as a person and learn how to navigate the beliefs of the world.

>"Studies show that..."
>No citations
Nice. Also if what you say is true then nobody can ever truly believe anything because they'll go back on it as soon as someone makes fun of them.

Yes, but rarely.
I think the fact we have Stormniggers wading in repeating the same shit again and again, and getting BTFO every time, shows that debate does not always work to change minds.

>According to the same study, the best way to "change someone's mind" is to ridicule them.
That's a stupid belief and you're a complete idiot for holding it.

The best way to change someone's mind is devil's advocate. If you understand how someone thinks and feels about something, you can use their own logic to prove your point right and cement that in their mind.

>I think the fact we have Stormniggers wading in repeating the same shit again and again, and getting BTFO every time, shows that debate does not always work to change minds.
What makes you think it's the same people?

Further, how do you know they're not baiting you?

...

Depends. I've personally had my mind changed by debate before, sometimes for as simple reasons as the other said had their facts straight and I didn't. I don't believe that everyone is just set in their ways forever, never changing. At the same time obviously most people aren't gonna change like a hat.

I actually had my mind sort of changed about illegal immigration. It was a thread on farm labor throughout history and how America still relies on dirt cheap labor for its farms. Basically that buisnesses and farms can pay more money, but refuse to see anything less than the absolute biggest profits they can manage, so they flood the market with labor, often illegal, and support the government to do so as to drive wages down. And if they can’t hire enough low wage immigrants, they cry “oy vey, we need more immigrants because how can I page actual minnimum wage instead of peanuts!”

Now I feel more anti illegal immigration but it’s kinda conflicting. There’s definetly a human element to all of this but at the same time mass immigration is fucking our economy.

>There’s definetly a human element to all of this
The problem with "human elements" to any debate is that there's actually human elements on both sides in every debate.

So for your example, yeah cracking down on immigration would suck for the would-be migrants. But what about the Americans who are being crowded out of the labor market, who now have to resort to welfare to feed themselves and/or their family? What about all the Americans who do have jobs who have to pay higher taxes to support that welfare? What about all the Americans who have to pay higher insurance premiums to cover all the illegal immigrants who get free treatment at hospitals?

The debates that never get solved are usually the ones with "human elements" on both sides. One person sympathizes and gets emotional with human element A, the other debater sympathizes and gets emotional with human element B.

>ridicule
I don't like that.
I prefer telling them how they are wrong, and see how incoherent and ilogical they are, then avoid ridiculing them and repeat this for all eternity.

William f buckley convinced me hippies and beatniks were faggots when I used to think they were cool.

>Have you ever changed your mind on some philosophical or political topic as a direct result of a debate?
Yes, but not immediately. People don't change their minds easily and when you're in a debate, you're in defense mode. But someone's words may stick with you in the days and weeks following the debate and lead you to reevaluate your beliefs.

Debating does not, listening does. And there's no way to get people to listen so it's usually futile.
>source: was a stormfag before I started lurking here for the history memes ≈1 year ago

Using their logic against them disproves their point, not proves your point.

>what about the Americans who are being crowded out of the labor market

The demand for products increases in proportion with the demand for labor. This should be kind of intuitive if you just think about it. If 100 immigrants move into your town of 1000, let's say, and let's assume they too need to and want to buy things like anyone else, there will be an increase in demand for goods and services by 10% which corresponds to a 10% increase in demand for labor.

Thats bullshit because humans specialize. One laborer produces enough food to feed hundreds of people. The immigrant increases supply but not demand.

>What makes you think it's the same people?
It's not always, but often you can tell, especially in slower boards like Veeky Forums.

>Further, how do you know they're not baiting you?
They have to be pretty sad to do that. Most of them will go on for hours. Back in my pol days (I'm really not proud of it) I argued with one of those idiots for the best part of a day, before I really understood Holocaust denial.
Usually, it's bait/trolling/ironic if they lose the argument.

Debate exists purely to crush the opposition so your side is emboldened to take further action and the opposition feels powerless and doesn't take further action. It's not about being "right" or "changing people's minds", it's about making the other side look like crazy asshats.

There's truth to this in the short run, but in the long run people's specialization and skills adapt to the needs of the market.

>Usually, it's bait/trolling/ironic if they lose the argument.
That's the problem; it's not that they're trolling or ironic, it's that the argument doesn't fucking matter. You see this with Holocaust Deniers: It's not that they actually care about whether or not the Holocaust happened, they're only denying it to make their other positions look better (IE, if the Holocaust didn't happen then the biggest reason to not give Nazism another try goes out the window).

A day or so ago on here there was a thread that basically devolved into a handful of autists vehemently denying that genes had any effect on humans or were even real. A number of anons posted that genes not only have effects on people, but were in fact real. It didn't matter though, they'd just argue themselves in circles because they don't actually give a shit about genes at all: They only "Believe" the genes bullshit because it buttresses their bizarre views on importing non-Europeans into Europe.

>A number of anons posted that genes
A number of anons posted evidence that genes*

I've had my opinions on gun control and US intervention seriously transformed through arguments online, but I think independent study tends to be much more significant in shaping beliefs

>genes affect people
>"if you don't agree with me you are importing non-europeans!"
This is why people like to troll you, brainlets. Link me the thread, please.

Idk if this counts.

But a lot of my historical knowledge has been gained by debates on Veeky Forums, and from being proven wrong in said debates about various topics.

Yeah. My biggest, personal example of this is probably abortion. I'm not going to say which side I used to take, but I now take the opposing stance.

I always was a little of a loose-man on it. Abortion for rape or incest regardless. But, I believe that it comes down to that I used to lean more one side than the other. Now it's vice-versa.

This is a result of debate and both logical/emotional/moral analysis on the matter.

That only works if you care about the opinion of the person mocking you. People can absolutely have their minds changed. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Yes, used to be a holocaust denier before coming to Veeky Forums Harrispilled