Tools of Apologetics 1.19.1
Responding To Debating Techniques
Chapter-1
Analyzing Debates
In debates Apologists have to keep analyzing their opponents’ arguments. Apologists have to keep several things in mind if such an analysis is to be successful and powerful. The first of these is to understand the purpose of conducting debates. Every debate has at least two purposes, a general and a specific.
The GENERAL PURPOSE in any debate and discussion is to arrive at truth. Winning or losing is not the concern of sincere debaters. Within the sphere of the general purpose, every debater has a SPECIFIC PURPOSE. In any given debate the specific purpose is to establish that one’s viewpoint is true. This is fine as long as it is done in the spirit of the General Purpose, which is to arrive at truth. However, biased debaters often forget that their purpose is to arrive at truth. Rather, their sole purpose with indulging in debate becomes winning.
When their attitude becomes "winning at any cost", they fail to observe the canons of fair debate. Instead, they concentrate all their energies on twisting the arguments in their favour. Fair and free debate is not possible in this kind of an atmosphere. All Christian Apologists should see to it that they do not waste their time and energy with people of this kind. At the same time, if there is no way for them to avoid these people, Apologists should try their best to bring the debater and the audience back to truth by repeated Leading Questions, and also by repeated affirmation of what the main issues are. Such repeated affirmations often look foolish both to the Apologist and also to many in the audience, but when the opponent is not sincere, this is the only way to keep the debate focused on the main subject.
Classification Of Debaters
As is evident to any inquirer, debaters are of many types. It is helpful to conduct a dialogue with some of them, while it is a waste of time or an invitation to frustration to conduct a dialogue with others. To decide if a debate is going to be helpful, it would be good to look at the two basic kinds of debaters. They are the Sincere and the Insincere types of debaters.
SINCERE DEBATERS: These are inquiring people who launch into debates solely for the purpose of knowing something. They know what they are talking about and are willing to look at all aspects of the issues involved. If they find anything wrong in their stand or in their deductions, they are willing to change their beliefs.
However, not all sincere believers are knowledgeable people. There are plenty who are sincere but who are, at the same time, not learned. They are attracted to the subject, but their knowledge of it all is very superficial. No sooner have the Apologist launched into a debate with them, than most of them realize their own inadequacy and then try to cover it up with fanciful talk.
A debate with such people can prolong considerably without ever arriving at anything meaningful. Thus when a Christian Apologist spots people who are fanciful, full of pretence, unsure of their stand, or unstable during the discussion, it is time to bring the discussion to a halt. The respondents are sincere, but ignorant. No meaningful debate can take place with them. What those persons need is instruction, not discussion. Unfortunately, sincere but ignorant debaters are often an obstacle to conducting serious debates. Thus in this matter their presence is as harmful as the presence of insincere debaters, whom we discuss next.
INSINCERE DEBATERS: All those people for whom debating is solely a means for the purpose of winning come in this category. There are many people of this kind everywhere. They are not interested in arriving at truth.
UNINTERESTED DEBATERS: Within the insincere category there are two kinds of people. The first group is made up of uninterested people. They pretend to take a keen interest in the subject, but deep in their hearts they have little interest in the subject. Thus their involvement in the debate is only superficial and the discussion cannot take place in depth. There are other insincere debaters who indulge in debate just for the fun of it or because they are in the habit of challenging whatever others say. Truth is not their concern and they are in love with their ability to argue. There is no use arguing with this kind of insincere debaters. The other category is made up of biased people.
BIASED DEBATERS: Biased debaters have already made up their minds on the issue. They are often aware of the consequences of taking a stand on either side. They are more interested in consequences favourable to themselves, and thus support an appropriate side even if that happens to be the erroneous side. Such debaters are biased, cunning and calculating. They do not believe in free exchange and evaluation of ideas. Rather, they are the people who indulge in the most cunning and calculated debate with the sole aim of winning at any cost.
Debating with insincere debaters is practically useless and can even prove damaging. A calculating and cunning debater can inflict much damage on truth-loving Apologists. Thus it is better to avoid such people, except perhaps in private debates where no third person is present. When they are alone, much of their enthusiasm is sapped because these manipulative people thrive upon manipulation of the mob-mentality. Since no mob is present, they have to face the Apologist directly and this often makes them weaker than they would be in front of a crowd.
comments
Leave a Reply
Powered by FireStats