Debating with respect and disagreeing well
You may disagree, but how you say it makes the difference. An argument is about the proposal, a fallacy about the person or about something nobody said.
Why
Why does a discussion in class sometimes end in a quarrel, and sometimes in a better idea?
People think differently, and that is good: together you come up with better ideas. But a conversation can quickly go wrong when people attack each other instead of listening.
When you recognise fallacies and give good arguments yourself, you can disagree strongly without hurting anyone. You need that in class, at home, in a youth movement and later in society.
See it
Read the proposal and choose a reply each time. The meter shows the temperature of the conversation: does it calm down or heat up?
Mira: The playground should get a green corner with trees.
Description of the picture
A debate meter with a needle from calm to heated. For a proposal about the playground you choose replies. An argument or an I-message makes the needle drop, an attack on the person or a straw man makes it rise.
Get it
An argument is about the proposal itself and gives a reason: I disagree, because then there is less room to play. An attack on the person is about who says something instead of what is said: you know nothing about it anyway.
There are other fallacies too. With a straw man, you turn what the other person says into something exaggerated and attack that. With a generalisation, you say something is always true or true for everyone, based on too little. With black-and-white thinking, you act as if there were only two choices.
Debating well starts with listening. Sum up what the other person said before you reply: if I understand you correctly, you mean this. That way the other person knows you really listened, and you do not talk past each other.
With an I-message you say what you think or feel, without blaming the other person: I am worried there will be less room. That works better than a you-message such as: you only think of yourself.
Freedom of expression is in the Constitution: you may say what you think, even if others disagree. That freedom has limits. You may not stir up hatred or violence, and you may not slander anyone with lies that damage their name.
React to what is said, not to who says it. Listen, sum up and give a reason.
Worked example
Mira proposes: the playground should get a green corner. Bram replies: "So you want to turn the whole playground into a forest?" What goes wrong, and how can Bram react better?
Mira asked for a green corner, not a forest. Bram exaggerates her proposal and attacks that. That is a straw man.
Bram can first sum up: if I understand you correctly, you want a corner with trees.
Then he gives his reason or an I-message: I am worried there will be less room to play football.
- Answer
Bram uses a straw man. It is better to sum up Mira's proposal and give a reason of his own.
Do it
Choose a level. You get a new exercise every time, checked straight away.
Pitfalls
Wrong: Whoever shouts loudest is right.
Speaking loudly does not make an argument stronger. It mainly makes others switch off.
Right: A good reason convinces more than a loud voice.
Wrong: If you disagree, you have to contradict the other person before they have finished.
Then you do not really know what the other person means, and you talk past each other.
Right: Let the other person finish and sum up what you heard before you speak yourself.
Wrong: Freedom of expression means you may say anything.
That freedom has limits too: stirring up hatred or violence and slander are not allowed.
Right: You may give any opinion, as long as you do not threaten, spread hatred or slander anyone.
In real life
- The pupil council discusses a proposal. Whoever sums up what the others said helps the group move forward.
- Under a post on a social network you often see attacks on the person. Nobody gets any wiser from that.
- In a class debate each group is given a point of view. That way you practise finding arguments, even for an opinion that is not your own.
- At home, a discussion about screen time heats up less when you say what you need instead of what the other person does wrong.
History
The Belgian Constitution dates from 1831. It protects freedom of expression and freedom of the press, and says that censorship can never be introduced.
At the table
Together, choose a topic you disagree on, for example where to go on holiday. First sum up the other person's opinion before you reply. What changes about the conversation?
A question to talk about together, for parents and children. There is no wrong answer.