Tools of Apologetics 1.18.4
Debating Techniques
An Analysis Of The Standard Techniques
Chapter 4
Debaters’ Tricks — I
In practical life debaters present their cases with so many twists and turns that people will think these opponents of the Bible have dozens (if not hundreds) of arguments at their disposal. Thus it often looks like a formidable task to handle those hundreds of arguments. However, these multitudes of arguments are manifestations of just a handful of basic techniques, and one has to master only these basic categories to fight back effectively.
All the approaches they use may be divided into the following six basic categories. Since each category of technique may be adapted in many ways, the total range of arguments looks numerous and formidable. The categorization that follows means that apologists do not have to master hundreds of debating techniques. Rather, if they manage just the six basic approaches, they can begin to counter debates effectively. These six approaches are:
1-Provocation/Emotional Manipulation
2-Generalization/Misguiding
3-Deceit/Outright Cheating
4-Sidetracking/Diverting
5-Creating Delusion/Confusion
6-Irrelevance/Idiocy
We shall study each one of these in detail. Since each approach may be used in a variety of ways, we shall also furnish some examples of this wide variety. However, it must be noted that these are only a limited number of examples chosen from a large variety that exist and that build upon the six basic approaches.
1-Provocation/Emotional Manipulation: A debate is an occasion when at least two sides are trying to present their case, with each side claiming to be right. Thus their approach to each other is adversarial, and the situation is mostly antagonistic. To arrive at truth in such a situation, it is necessary for Apologists to maintain their emotional balance.
Emotions have no intelligence, and once Apologists lose their emotional control they fall into much useless and senseless discussion which will only defeat their purposes. Knowing this, many debaters try to provoke (or emotionally manipulate) Apologists to destroy the composure with which they present their case. Apologists should therefore be very careful about controlling their emotions. A look at the following methods of creating provocation will help them further to understand this strategy:
THE USE OF EMOTIONALLY COLOURED WORDS: Words are powerful tools not only for communicating with people, but also for their emotional manipulation. This emotional aspect of words is exploited for good by people who deliver patriotic speeches to motivate people into action. The same is true when a person issues an emotionally charged appeal for spiritual commitment, or for involvement in a spiritual task. The same power can be used to manipulate opponents into losing their balance. Many words have multiple meanings. Most people use words in the direct sense denoted by the word. As previously mentioned, a large number of words (whether in daily or in technical use) have two types of meanings — the actual one, and the implied ones. The implied meanings may, in many cases, be totally different from the actual meaning. They may even have a pejorative or indicting meaning.
People who use language well can thus choose words in such a way that their speech denotes a totally harmless and right meaning, but the connotations may be highly damaging or defaming to the opponent. Thus the words ‘dog’ and ‘bitch’ in normal use denote the male and female of a domesticated animal. However, in religious and social circles these words have many connotations that are damaging to people’s characters.
A person knowledgeable in the multiple meanings of words can use them in such a way that the hidden meaning provokes opponents and they lose their balance. Christian apologists should be careful of this tactic and should make it a habit to ignore all kinds of provocation. They should stick to the main subject till the end and only that will give them victory.
PROVOKING OPPONENTS SO AS TO DESTROY THEIR BALANCE: In addition to using emotionally coloured words, opponents may use any number of contrived stories, allegations and such speech to provoke Apologists. Often they will find their opponents hurling abuses and even false charges against them, their stand, and even their characters. This might be a shock to Apologists who enter the fray If Apologists ever become provoked, they will lose their balance, be drawn into irrelevant arguments and lose their main thrust. The only answer is to ignore all the arguments aimed at provoking one. Experienced debaters can handle the situation by throwing opponents’ allegations back at them, but this has to be done with great caution and it is not meant for inexperienced apologists.
USING THE OPPONENTS’ ANGER AS PROOF THAT THEIR POINT IS WEAK: Many times those who take the weaker side of the argument become angry when they start losing. But often even those on the stronger side become irritated and angry when they are not able to convey their arguments in a persuasive manner. Whatever the case, the audience has the impression that Apologists are getting angry because they are losing the battle. Once Apologists become angry or irritated, opponents can successfully charge that this anger is the result of their weak arguments. Apologists should learn to keep their temper under control, lest the opponents obtain the advantage in this matter.
ARGUMENT BY ATTRIBUTING PREJUDICE OR OTHER SUCH MOTIVES TO ONE’S OPPONENT: A debate is expected to be a forum for discovering truth. However, if any one of the parties can be demonstrated to have an ulterior motive, the other party can win by default. Thus this approach is used by many people on the weaker side.
The party on the weaker side might charge the stronger opponents with greed, malice, vested-interest, or any such allegation that gives the impression that their interest is selfish in nature. Christian Apologists will have to learn to face these allegations repeatedly from those who hold on to error, and not lose control. Rather, they should keep to the facts and win the arguments.
comments
Leave a Reply
Powered by FireStats