Quotes About Debate

Do not discuss the religious matters with people; do not waste your valuable time to discuss the untruth! Your time is short; spend it for the science and the art!

After a lifetime of engaging in long, passionate discussions I have come to the conclusion that it is a waste of time trying to convince anyone of anything.

There have been daring people in the world who claimed that Fenimore Cooper could write English, but they are all dead now.

Two things which are the peculiar domain of the heart, not the mind—politics and religion. He doesn't want to know the other side. He wants arguments and statistics for his own side, and nothing more.

There is nothing in the world like persuasive speech to fuddle the mental apparatus.

No amount of evidence will ever persuade an idiot.

No one in the world speaks blemishless grammar; no one has ever written it--NO one, either in the world or out of it (taking the Scriptures for evidence on the latter point); therefore it would not be fair to exact grammatical perfection from the peoples of the Valley; but they and all other peoples may justly be required to refrain from KNOWINGLY and PURPOSELY debauching their grammar.

There is nothing in the world like a persuasive speech to fuddle the mental apparatus.

Some of you are most likely thinking that white is not really a colour and all of that tired sort of nonsense. Well, I'm here to tell you that it is. White is without question a colour, and personally, I don't think you want to argue with me.

White is without question a color, and personally, I don't think you want to argue with me.

The ability to detect fallacy is one of the things that makes democratic life decent.

Certainly, dialectic is a magnificent thing. But one never finds the dialectic, as if it were a mill which exists somewhere and into which one empties whatever one chooses, or whose mechanism one could modify according to taste and need.

Every revolutionary movement has its peaks of united activity and its valleys of debate and internal confusion. This debate might well have been little more than a healthy internal difference of opinion, but the press loves the sensational and it could not allow the issue to remain within the private domain of the movement. In every drama there has to be an antagonist and a protagonist, and if the antagonist is not there the press will find and build one.

It doesn't have to exist in reality as long as people give it a kind of reality by talking and writing and arguing about it.

a man may be very dogmatic in his opposition to dogma. Such

There actually is an imbecile in existence who asserts that the earth is flat and who has persuaded many people to adopt his view.

A last trick is to become personal, insulting and rude as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand. In becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack on the person by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character. This is a very popular trick, because everyone is able to carry it into effect.

Dialectic is the art of intellectual fencing; and it is only when we so regard it that we can erect it into a branch of knowledge.

The only certain rule is the one that Aristotle already gave: do not dispute with anyone and everyone, but only with those people you know who are intelligent enough to avoid saying things that are so stupid as to expose themselves to humiliation, who appreciate the truth, and who gladly listen to good reasons, even when the opponent claims them, and who are balanced enough to bear a defeat when the truth is on the other side.

Those who are so zealous and eager to settle debated questions by citing authorities, are really glad when they are able to put the understanding and the insight of others into the field in place of their own, which are wanting.

Quando percebemos que o adversário é superior e que acabará por não nos dar razão, então nos tornamos pessoalmente ofensivos, insultuosos, grosseiros. O uso das ofensas pessoais consiste em sair do objeto da discussão e passar ao contendor, atacando, de uma maneira ou de outra, a sua pessoa.

Dowodz?c komukolwiek zupe?nie spokojnie, ?e nie ma racji, a wi?c b??dnie my?li i s?dzi — a bywa to przy ka?dym dialektycznym zwyci?stwie — z?o?cisz go wi?cej ni? gburowato?ci? i obelgami

je?eli dysputujÄ… dwie pospolite gÅ'owy, okazuje siÄ™, ?e or??em wybranym przez nie sÄ… autorytety; bijÄ… siÄ™ wspólnie autorytetami

Do?? cz?sto po o?ywionym sporze ka?dy z dysputuj?cych powraca do siebie ze zdaniem przeciwnika. Wprost pozamieniali si? ze sob? w?asnymi pogl?dami. Nie sztuka wi?c dowodzi?, ?e w sporach winno si? mie? na wzgl?dzie tylko wyja?nienie prawdy; ale w?a?nie chodzi o to, ?e jeszcze nie wiadomo, gdzie jest ta prawda, gdy? argumenty przeciwnika i nasze w?asne wprowadzaj? nas w b??d