If anything in human history has brought progress it is the “scientific discussion approach” so my suggestion is that we keep our discussion within that approach.
This means a couple of core points:
- You make a point sustain it and go on leaving it to the auditorium to get its own opinion about the valididty of the point made - you do not try to “win the discussion”.
- Stupid comments get no answer and are simply ignored
- Personal attacks are considered not talkworthy and get ignored
- What counts is the strength of the point made not the conviction and frequency with it is repeated and insisted on
- Topics always come with a “reading list” everybody talking is supposed to have read and understood the themes that are in the reading list. If anybody makes a comment that shows a “non knowledge” of the reading list - he is not considered a “talkworthy partner” and his comments are widley ignored as “umpa lumpa talk”.
- when ever you get no answer to something you have said consider the reason for not getting an answer in the fields mentioned above - take it as “courtesy” that nobody answers your comment and go back to the reading list - you will find your answer there.
- science is not neccesaryly democratic it does not count who has the “mayority of applause” the only thing that counts is who has the valid point.
- do not expect that somebody makes an “effort to convince you”. In science you make a point and go on “the unconvinced rest” does neither interest nor bother you - the only thing that matters is a valid point well presented.
- in science you do not repeate the same debate with any newcommer over and over again, you write it down once - and then you point people to the link without saying anything further to give them a chance to read up what they obviously need to read up, if they come back showing with their comments that they did not make their homework you ignore them as not debate worthy.
- in science you are always free to “negate debate” because you consider it pointless, waste of time, umpa lumpa talk, you only engage in debate that brings up something “interesting”.
- in science you never “venture off topic” when in debate you make a point and you make it straight forward
- do not postulate things that are “opinion” as if it where “fact” - you will be called out on that - get used to differ opinion and fact precisely.
- do not postulate something you have not tested - you will be called out on that.
14 ) science is not very patient with “chatty commenting” about your roof and its leaking, aunt mimies overbones, etc… - you will be called to make your point very quick and precise and not waste the auditoriums time
15 ) nothing is “personal and heated” in scientific debate - only presenting valid points and links to studies and info matters.
16 ) when a valid point is made discussion is over (nobody is discussing if the sun is center of the solar sistem anymore in heated debates - this debate was on in Nicolaus Copernicus times - it is kind of over today -)
17 ) discussion is never “completly over” it only reaches a status where nobody cares about “exotic opinions” anymore… nobody is interested in “convincing the last man standing with the wrong perception” - after the point is made - the scientific world has moved on - somebody with a “exotic opinion” is always present and left behind nobody cares. If you are the bunga bunga don’t expect somebody to come back to convince you with facts that YOU can accept - a quick pointer to a “read up link” is the best courtesy you can expect. Do not expect to be able to “ignite the discussion again” do not expect and insist to get your answers so that YOU can accept the point - you will simply be ignored and pointed to read.