Stop Losing Debates (The #1 Thing)

I bet you lose a lot of debates. I bet you’ve offered up some fantastic points only to be clobbered by a room (or Facebook group) of unpersuaded, skeptics.

On topics related to Donald Trump, God’s existence, the minimum wage, abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, socialism, or state nullification, you’ve found yourself tongue-tied. You’re unable to answer the skeptics.

Or perhaps the naysayers didn’t crush you because you remained silent. You looked away waiting for the topic to change. Perhaps you thought of responses but figured they weren’t good enough to share.

Well, I’ve been there done that. All of that. I’ve offered what I thought were brilliant points for Classical Theism, only to be shut down immediately.  I’ve also stayed silent plenty of times.

So, what’s the alternative?

One key to stop losing debates is to stop having debates. If either party perceives a discussion as a debate, each person will plan a rebuttal while the other is speaking. The conversation is tenser and less fruitful. Each participant strives to avoid looking foolish. Saving face becomes the goal.

The alternative: Aim for dialogue instead of debate.

 

The #1 Thing to Get Right

The #1 thing you need to discuss tough topics works in-person and on social media. It will significantly improve your conversations, even if you don’t improve your intellectual capital by 1%.

So, what is the #1 thing?

TO ASK QUESTIONS rather than make statements. Replace ASSERTIONS with QUESTIONS. Avoid flinging claims back and forth. Avoid citing mounds of research, studies, facts, and evidence (at least initially). At the beginning of every dialogue, ask questions. Save assertions for later in the conversation.  

This approach allows you to enter into dialogue and takes you off the hot seat. Dialogue is distinct from debate.  Debates are often about scoring points, while dialogues are more easily directed toward truth.

You will use questions with the following goals in mind:

1. Require others to articulate their views clearly
2. Require others to justify their views
3. Highlight weaknesses in their views

Many people ignore (1) repeatedly. People launch into a defense without clarifying what the other person is criticizing! Consider this. The day after President Donald Trump announced two of his cabinet picks, I had the following exchange with a colleague:

Colleague:  Did you hear Trump just appointed two racists to his cabinet?

Me: I don’t know, I think the media blows a lot of that out of proportion.  They call a lot of people rascists.

I am not a Trump voter. And I am very far from supporting anyone on the left. But I dislike my reply. I blew the perfect opportunity to use the #1 thing. I made counter-assertions when I could have asked questions to clarify, require justification, or highlight weaknesses. Here is how it could have went:

Colleague:  Did you hear Trump just appointed two racists to his cabinet?

Me: Interesting. What exactly do you mean by racist? And what makes you think they are racist? 

Notice how this takes the pressure of myself. The other person now has to clarify what they mean by the term ‘racist’ and explain how they know those two people fit into that definition. While it’s possible he had a ready answer, it’s more likely he did not prepare to clarify and justify. By asking questions, I would have slowed the conversation, forced the person to think, and headed toward the truth of the matter. This is what you need to do when entering dialogue on tough topics.

What Specific Questions Should We Ask?

Here’s a nugget from a master at this #1 thing, “Simply put, never make a statement, at least at first, when a question can do the job.” The 3 specific questions can be varied depending on the topic, but they follow this format:

1. What do you mean by that?
2. How did you come to that conclusion?
3. Have you ever considered [x, y, or z]. . . ?

These 3 specific questions are taken from Greg Koukl’s excellent book Tactics: A Gameplan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions. Notice how they correspond to the 3 goals of questioning: (1) focus on clarity (2) require justification and (3) aim to highlight weaknesses. More questions can be added to this list (Catholic apologist Trent Horn lists 4 important questions here). However, starting with the 3 specific questions alone equips you for more productive dialogue.

An Atheist/Christian Dialogue

Here’s an example of how to start using the 3 specific questions when talking with an atheist:

Atheist: God definitely does not exist. Fairy tales are good for children but not for adults. God is just like Santa Claus or the flying spaghetti monster. A superhero for grown-ups. It’s quite silly to believe in God as an adult.

Christian: You say God does not exist. I’m curious, what do you mean by God?

Atheist: Well, you know, he’s a superhero type character like Santa Clause. A made-up being like Zeus or all of the other Gods of mythology.

Christian: Interesting thoughts, how did you come to the conclusion that God does not exist? 

Atheist: Basically, I grew up. I realized that true things require evidence and are discoverable by science. God is not like that at all. He’s just a made up character like I’ve mentioned already.

Christian: I see. Well, I will say that I believe in God, and I think I’m a reasonable person. However, you also seem to me a reasonable person, and I’m open to hearing more about what you have to say. Have you ever considered any evidence for God? For example, the Kalam argument or the argument from contingency, which show that God best explains the beginning of the universe and why anything exists at all?

Atheist: Hmm, I think I’ve heard of things along those lines. I don’t find it persuasive. Most people who talk about God just end up falling back on personal feelings.

Christian: Personal testimony can be very important to Christians, but I can tell that is not what you are looking for. It seems you are looking for evidence that God exists, and that is precisely what the Kalam and contingency arguments provide. Have you ever considered this? [Insert presentation of Contingency or Kalam argument, These arguments are explained at in short, videos: here and here.]

End of the mock discussion.

I hope this illustrates some of the power of asking questions. It is the #1 thing you want to get right when discussing tough topics. As Aristotle and St. Thomas both note, “A small error in the beginning grows enormous in the end.” Avoid the error of jumping right into a speech of counter-claims.

In summary:

1. Stop having debates. Have dialogues.
2. ASK QUESTIONS rather than making statements.

Now, click here to find out the 3 Tips to prevent your discussions from going to Hell.