Health and Lifestyle Stories

Claiming to be one of the few argumentative coaches in Vietnam, I always face difficulties in having a better understanding of this subject. Definition, no matter how good, is just a way of expression given by people, which is never always right. After a long time of reflection, I would like to share a little with you some of my thoughts and interpretations of the debate.

What is the Argument?

The controversy is not an unfamiliar activity for each of us. When someone says that Ms. Hoang Thuy Linh is just a poor girl, unlucky and others do not think so, it is a dispute. When someone says that K-pop is nothing but cool guys and a bunch of crazy fans to face a series of protests, it's a debate. In the simplest sense, the debate takes place when something receives the support of a part, and the other part does not. They say their point of view, oppose the opponent's point of view, that is the argument.

Common beliefs about the purpose of debate

In a dispute between two factions, there is never a winner or loser without the appearance of a 3rd force: Arbitration. You cannot use argument to prove one thing is true, it is like proving that heavy objects fall fast and light objects fall slowly, if not doing experiments, all theories are just theory. In my opinion, this is a serious misunderstanding of people about debate. No court can make judgments based on arguments, speculations and assumptions. Without witnesses and evidence, nothing can be concluded. And even if there is evidence or witness, the verdict is made not by the prosecutor or the defense attorney, that judgment depends on the judge's sense of justice - a person .
Persuasion of the enemy is not the main purpose of a debate , even though sometimes this purpose is done. If you can use a video recorder to prove Ms. Hoang Thuy Linh is an evil girl, you don't need to use arguments, then it's no longer called argument. It is difficult to use argument for Ms. Huyen Chip to agree that she is a liar, or Ngoc Trinh admits that she is just a money and selfish person.

Anyone has their beliefs, and right or wrong depends on that belief. People do not need to argue in what everyone believes is true as the earth is round and turning around the sun. People who use arguments in cases that support or oppose are ultimately just a matter of belief or opinion. So, in every official debate, the winner or the loser depends on the judge's judgment - a neutral person, not when a party stops and loses.

So what is the purpose of debate?

Karl Popper considers debate a tool for us to turn to truth. The result of any debate is not the truth, but the process of mutual denial of opposing views allows us to get closer to the truth, by gradually denying inaccurate things, we get closer to what we want.

I am an agnostic, believe in finite possibilities of people. Even if we are God's children, we are still not God. So, I don't pursue the ultimate truth - which is always true. For me, debate is a decision support tool .

- Should I change the Golden Bird to Hoang Anh in the Tam Cam story?
- Should we take the Long Bien Bridge and build a new bridge?
- Should electricity prices increase?

Those are the options that arguments can help us make a decision. Capital decisions are not right or wrong, or even if they are, it is difficult for anyone to be sure of the right and wrong of each decision. In any case, making a decision is indispensable, and even though forecasting the weather may not be accurate, carrying raincoats as forecast is still better than going out with praying that the sun will be sunny. .

The dress, the mind does not submit

People do not always act rationally, and think by reason. Any sprawling mother-in-law used to be a daughter-in-law, any violent father with children who used to be a child, that fact didn't stop the loop of those behaviors. . So, in competitions, winning is always due to the referee. In contested competitions, it is not uncommon for losers to fail to respond to the referee's results, in fact, it is impossible even to expect a person who is committed to accepting your arguments. Just as I know that a full body tattoo girl or a regular smoker can't say her personality is bad, there's no reason to convince me to marry such a girl.

For me, debate is often not of high value when there are only two opposing parties. Like two dead people who meet each other, or win or lose, or dead fish with a torn net, there is never a problem where one side bowed its head wrongly. Even more, people are more likely to be pushed to the extreme side of the problem when participating in a faction in the debate, as a result, instead of understanding each other more and more people are getting farther apart.

My experience is to avoid using arguments in issues that contain a lot of personal feelings, and should not argue with those who do not have the spirit of debate. The argumentant, who is important to argue and respect the evidence, and who has no spirit of argument, only respects defeat and retorts the sentence.

Argue, need to promote in education

In the Vietnamese context, I think it is necessary to further strengthen the debate application. Increasing the critical thinking of students is also a way to repel the prejudices, the ways of thinking of future generations. Sophistication, which is understood as a way of listening, sounds logical and logical, but in fact is absurd, such as a personal attack, mass appeal, relying on compassion ... But it is easy. realize that these fallacies seem to be considered obvious and reasonable in the community. We protect and explain a behavior simply because "being a child in the family must be" until "this society must be" because "being a Vietnamese must be" "Vietnamese culture that is "" there is no one ".

The debate is not an almighty tool, like any other tool, its performance depends on the way the user is. But if used properly, a debate is an extremely effective tool in minimizing the reality of "reading master"; is the perfect spice for subjects that are considered boring, ineffective like history or literature; is the enemy of prejudice "what you say is true, books never go wrong." In a debate, people speak their opinions, protect their views, challenge their own prejudices, not repeat what others say.

Hopefully, more and more people will learn more about this exciting field.