While I am not aware of the what the specific linguistics related to debate are - I understand basic fundamental principles those able to identify a "red herring" or "straw-man argument seem completely incapable of grasping.
- The moment you attack the other person in the debate (rather than their points of logic) you have committed a foul. You are basically telling the person you have nothing worthwhile to contribute to the conversation, and cannot defend your ridiculous point of view - so you are hoping they will be sidetracked with a personal attack. If you don't have anything to contribute - just freakin walk away. You don't need to make yourself look like a deluded idiot for the amusement of other people. Examples include (but are not limited to): You're high (thanks Gabe), you're gay (thanks omiolo), you have a porn addiction, Jesus loves you - the rest of us think you're an idiot, if you had one more brain cell it would be lonely, have you considered checking yourself into a mental institution, you are mean.
- There are certain people who kill your credibility when you throw their names into an argument (Hitler, Stalin,ect;). Comparing your opponents to these people means that you have absolutely no original thought and are reaching to find a comparison that people will feel a feral reaction to. No one will ever be Hitler. Nothing in history, past or present, comes close to the holocaust. Leave these things out of arguments and debates. They are ridiculous hyperbole and make you look like a whiney child.
- Do not throw out random facts and statistics that you cannot back up with any concrete evidence. I could say that only 20% of men have ever masterbated - it's not true, but I can say it. Without valid (and I MUST stress the importance of VALID) resources to back up this claim - I sound like a complete moron with no grip on reality.
- Do not pick three words out of a thousand word argument and make the entire argument about those three words... For example a argument about evolution will inevitably cite Darwin, attacking Darwinian theory by saying "Man did not evolve from apes" is taking one piece of the argument (without really understanding Darwin) and attempting to destroy the entire theory of evolution based on a few conclusions that have been misinterpreted or misrepresented. Argue about the main points and not side stuff that does not address the actual argument.
- If you are the type of person that likes to argue just to be a pain in the ass to everyone around you - please stop. We don't need your imput about everything. If I happen to like Linkin' Park and you think they are a bunch of pussies - fine, I honestly don't need your opinion on everything in my life. That's why it is referred to as MY life. Find a forum, internet site, group of people who like to argue about innane and ridiculous things and leave the people around you alone.
- If you enjoy arguing and believe that you have never lost an argument, there is a good chance that you are simply completely unable to see another person's point of view. Try this helpful suggestion - tense the lower intestine and attempt to release the head from the anal cavity. If this does not work, you may need to see a professional to remove your head from your rectum.
- Wow, look at that sky today - talk about blue.
- How about those (insert name of local sports team)
- Why don't we talk about something less likely to start a fight, like religion or politics?
- You know... I just realized - my boobies hurt
- Yeah, that's interesting, I need to go shave my cat
- I would like to talk about that, but I've been meaning to alphabetize my socks
- Have you considered getting a colonoscopy lately?
