I've just realised that I can't debate theists

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

I've never been able to debate with theists, without losing my temper.

I seldom try,but not for that reason. I don't bother because :

(1) I need prove nothing

(2) I really,truly don't care about people's personal superstitions unless they get in my face. In daily life I walk way chortling to myself and shaking my head.They hate that.

(3) That kind of debate seldom proves anything; I do not confuse winning an argument with being right necessarily.

(4) I do not suffer fools.

[Norfolk And Chance]

So, I was debating a christian the other day, and they said something utterly ridiculous - as they are wont to do - and I couldn't contain my temper. This got me to thinking; I've never been able to debate with theists, without losing my temper.

Every time that someone quotes scripture, or uses circular reasoning to support their argument, it really pisses me off to the point where I see red. I'm talking spots before my eyes and veins popping in my neck. Picture stressed Eric; only with a handsome Irish guy as the main character.

Anyway, can anyone give me advice on how to better handle these situations?

Bang their lights out.

[Gambit]

With me, it depends on the situation. Over here such opportunities for live debate are few and far between, and I don't go looking for them. In the past, when I was more likely to encounter these situations (which I don't anymore; an involved story) I would often feel my temper flaring to the point where I knew I'd have to walk away or do/say something regrettable. My Sam was well aware of this and would grab my arm and steer me in some other direction if she spotted someone preaching in the street or whatever. The one thing guaranteed to set my explosion off is the smug, condescending smile that they all-too-often wear when they realise they have no other leg to stand on, usually with some biblespam and a "well, I'll pray for you to find the truth" or similar as a bonus feature.

If my opponent is more open to hearing me out, even if they don't agree with what I'm saying, and they don't press my detonation button, we might have an interesting exchange of views. It's quite startlingly rare for that to be the case, I have to say.

I so wish I had someone to do that for me; alas, all the women I seem to align myself with are always religitards, so they are usually throwing stones from the other side. It's that smile though, you are right. Why I let it get under my skin so much, I don't know.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Of course if you were able to debate with grace and without resorting to anger or insults, like 'religiards', then you would win the debate by example, rather than words. Whenever I find myself responding in anger, its because I'm focused on proving how right I am, rather than a sincere desire to understand the other person or persuade them for their benefit.

[Cyberman]

Yeah, well, welcome to the human race. I apologise for having human feelings and for finding a condescending attitude in lieu of argument offensive. Personally, I never go out of my way to be insulting, relying instead on some form of biting wit to do the job for me. However, piss me off and I will bite back.

[Tempus]

Of course if you were able to debate with grace and without resorting to anger or insults, like 'religiards', then you would win the debate by example, rather than words. Whenever I find myself responding in anger, its because I'm focused on proving how right I am, rather than a sincere desire to understand the other person or persuade them for their benefit.

I agree. Anger is often a natural response to challenges to one's own position as well as to propositions that one considers ridiculous. Feeling anger sometimes can't be helped, but to let that anger inform responses in a debate is a sign of poor debating skills in my opinion. Anger fuelled responses in a debate are superfluous at best. In my eyes there's no excuse for unnecessary insults on online forums. Posts can be reviewed and edited. In fact, I came close to making unnecessary slights in the writing of this very post. I just read it over and edited it out because it helps no one.

As for the saying "you can't reason a person out of a position they didn't reason themselves into" - this can't be true. Many atheists are former Christians, Muslims, deists etc. If Christianity (for example) is unreasonable, as many atheists hold it is, then how are Christians reasoned out of it? Reasoning skills are learned over time. Sometimes people are lucky and have a good school or good parents which send their minds in this direction from the get-go. Sometimes people stumble upon it by accident from a position of ignorance, like I did. Expecting to reason people out of their positions in one sitting is a tall order. People take time to process information, particularly when there's an emotional investment. Further, sometimes it is even necessary to teach the very reasoning skills that underpin one's argument before the conclusion is accepted.

I see people become frustrated about people not accepting the evidence of evolution (again, an example) - but perhaps their frustration would turn to understanding if they realised that their opponent places different values on evidence. Perhaps in some cases the problem would be revealed to be that person A is amounting a large pile of evidence, not realising that person B doesn't actually value evidence (or physical evidence). If person A is to establish their case they must first show Person B why evidence (or physical evidence) should be valued, what types are valid and why, which evidence is better than which and why, etc. However, it's often that Person A in this scenario will simply give up and say that Person B is 'wilfully ignorant' or 'stupid' which may not be so - it may be that their differences in values must be resolved before a fruitful discussion on evolution can ensue. A video by Evid3nc3 on youtube about Evidentialism comes to mind.

This is a good video which is somewhat relevant and contains suggestions about managing oneself in a debate:

[Creed of Heresy]

To everyone else - do any of you have an extremely short fuse, and are prone to exploding? If so, how do you deal with that?

*raises hand waaaay up in the air*

It's no secret to anyone here that when someone starts claiming logical fallacies to be actual evidence that I react like someone just flipped my Kill-Switch. I guess I'm just simply incapable of being civil to people who go through lives with their heads acting as a very firmly-lodged self-inserted butt-plug. However, when someone shows a willingness to learn and understand, or shows that they're ignorant not by choice but rather by genuine ignorance, I find it EXTREMELY easy to be relaxed and calm while discussing things with them. It's a matter of understanding whether someone is unintentionally ignorant, or intentionally ignorant. The intentionally ignorant are irredeemable. They're idiots. They're irrational and illogical and frankly I consider them dangerous individuals because the conclusions they come to will be in error and who is to say some if not many of those conclusions won't be of the moral variety? But the unintentionally ignorant are to be talked to gently and encouragingly, and while they may take years to shed their ignorance...let's face it, most of us freethinkers on this site, and in general are individuals who started as unintentionally ignorant and were shown by someone else or by some other source the fallacies in our thinking and we made our own corrections.

The human mind DOES have the innate ability to self-correct and most people DO.

But don't spare a single friggin' courtesy to those idiots who spend their days happily tonguing Jesus' hairy unwashed holy balls while they know perfectly well that their shit makes no damn sense; they bring down the Wrath of the Reasonably Righteous upon their own self-damned heads.

---

In my eyes there's no excuse for unnecessary insults on online forums. Posts can be reviewed and edited. In fact, I came close to making unnecessary slights in the writing of this very post. I just read it over and edited it out because it helps no one.

You probably hate the shit out of me, then.

[frankiej]

I don't debate theists any more. I gave up a while ago.

If you just hit them with comedy and humour then it is them who usually get angry and whiny while you just sit back and laugh. No point trying any more.

[KichigaiNeko]

They really aren't worth the effort. Don't "debate" unless someone is of reasonable mindset and is seriously interested

[el_presidente]

Strive to make points rather than win arguments. Plant seeds!

Also take into consideration that the person you're talking to directly may never change their mind, but the people around you listening might assuming you're in a group. Play off of the 'tard for the benefit of making your point to the broader audience. It's easier to control yourself when you step back from the my point vs your point battle and reframe it.