Have you ever changed your position on something due to online or email "debate"?

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

I'm not talking so much about someone agreeing that some factual item that they didn't know about was true when someone else demonstrated or linked it to them ("huh, Joe Gibbs DID win 3 Super Bowls with 3 different quarterbacks, whaddyaknow!"), but rather someone's whole position on a topic.

Gun Control is right/wrong.
Capital punishment is right/wrong.
The Bush Administration is trustworthy.
Invading and occupying Iraq was and is the right action for the U.S. to take.
The offsides rules in football/soccer are fine just the way they are.

etc., etc.

I think most people have too much pride to capitulate a position based on any one argument, it would require acknowledging the opponent is right and they are wrong, which is more difficult than simply being wrong, even if there is a nagging internal recognition (subconsciously or on the surface) that one is wrong.

When people DO fundamentally change position, even if it is largely influenced by arguments or evidence presented by others, I think there is a process of internal reflection resulting from an accumulation of arguments and evidence contrary to the prior belief that occurs some distance from the arena of debate, and the individual acknowledges change. Later, they may or may not acknowledge the influence of others on this change.

I suppose the followup to this is the question "What are your reasons for engaging in online debates, arguments, and flame wars?" This is a natural question since the majority of such discussions do NOT change minds, and result in the parties talking at/past each other, often in an angry and unpleasant manner.

Is the goal to actually change the other's mind, as unlikely as that is?
Is the goal simply to express one's viewpoint and have it heard?
On a discussion board, is your goal for third parties reading the discussion, whose opinions may not be as rigid as your opponents, or who may not have an opinion yet, to be influenced by your arguments?

[hippiechick]

1. Yes.

:hi:

[Taxloss]

2. My opinions have been steered and influenced by debate here, yes.

A process that continues.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

3. BINGO!!

To your last four lines.

[rucky]

4. I think the intent of the postings are coded into the tone of the message.

People who want to persuade are usually either really really friendly or really really factual (or both).

If you're trying to show how stupid somebody is, or express opinions that are filled with bile towards the opposition, then don't expect to change any minds.

[TahitiNut]

22. When advocates of a position resort to falsehoods, distortions, and insults ...

... I'm inclined to reject that position. I don't believe our opinions are binary - they evolve and migrate over time. Rarely have I ever 'flipped' from a tentative position to the opposite, but have changed over time. My opinion on capital punishment, for example, has changed from being in favor of it for the most heinous crimes to being completely and adamantly opposed ... largely because my analysis of the positions in favor dug down and found nothing of merit but propelled by the often-unmitigated venom of many who favor it.

My position on illegal migrants and immigration in general has been evolving as well - again propelled in part by the foamy-mouthed venom and abusive rhetoric being employed. For the grandson of immigrants, this has been a careful 'journey' and my life experiences have disclosed (first-hand) appalling abuses and exploitation. I have a habit of challenging my own inclinations and when I seek a rational and reasoned counterpoint and get nothing but bile and venom, I tend to feel confident I'm not missing something salient.

[brer cat]

37. Well put, TahitiNut.

My position on a number of issues has changed over time based on a better understanding of the issue after reading sound, thoughtful postings from people who have a different perspective, or broader knowledge. We are blessed with many posters on DU who do offer that (and I include you in my list of respected posters), and those who spout bile and venom can be ignored.

Personally, I'm thankful that age 60 I can still "learn a new trick," and I'm open to that education.

[ananda]

5. in a way

Sometimes I've modified a position, depending on what it was.
For me, it's hard to change a stance I'm emotionally or
psychically invested in.. and I can get mean about it.
What has to happen first is to reduce the emotional or psychic
charge. That takes time. It usually takes several days or
even weeks of discussion to do that. Then I can modify.

That -has- happened. I've become much more patient with
people who are not interested in the intuitive or psychic side
of life, with atheists, and with control freaks... but as I've said,
it's taken time.

DU has helped me modify some positions on issues and
candidates... which has been most helpful. Thanks.

Sue

[BlackVelvet04]

6. Yep...

I sure have changed my position. But then I was accused of being a troll who never held the other position to begin with.

[lonestarnot]

7. arguments have definitely changed my opinions, don't know about

influencing anyone.

[Rosemary2205]

8. Yes, by the cumulative effect of the information provided here.

I have not been pursuaded by anyone specific's opinion. But the overall insights and raw information provided on DU and elsewhere on the net has had an overall effect on me.

This site in particular has been a VALUABLE resource to me.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

9. I've modified some elements of my positions based on them, yes

But changing my overall stance on something? No way. Those things are based on my fundamental core values. That's not to say that I've never reversed a position on something. I have, but not because of someone's persuasive arguments. So it's as you say for me. It's the accumulation of arguments and contrary evidence that lead me to make a big internal shift. So when I argue with someone online, or anywhere, it's in the hopes of presenting my view to less-interested bystanders. It became especially important to me a few years ago to not remain silent in the face of the unrelenting neo-con propaganda. I used to be one of those people who feared getting into heated debates or bringing up certain issues. Not anymore.

[mzteris]

10. yes. n/t

[Mz Pip]

11. I know I am more

inclined to consider different points of view if they are presented in an intelligent manner. Ad hominum attacks, name calling, straw man arguments do nothing to give me pause.

I will at least pay attention to a different point of view if I do not feel like I am being given a lecture or being treated like a first grader.

There have been some positions that I've changed my mind about over the years, but this is due more to opinions considered over a longer period of time as opposed to one post or email. I'm flexible and open-minded about some things but that does not mean I can be one over easily.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[LeftishBrit]

12. Yes, in a way

Not so much by anyone's specific opinion, as by learning a bit more about the USA as a whole, which has modified some of my views of American politics.

[Tyo]

13. Yes, capital punishment being one

My mind was changed by reading and discussion. I'd always been ambivalent about it, but supported it because some crimes seemed terrible enough to warrant it. I still think that there are crimes that warrant death, but there is no making amends for executing the wrong person. Until we can bring people back to life we have no business using death as a punishment.

As for debates, more often than not what I get is clarification and often a rethinking of my own position.

Flame wars have a bad rap in my opinion. I find them both entertaining and cathartic and I am sad when they get shut down.

[johnaries]

29. I changed my mind on Captial Punishment, as well.

I used to support it as detterent, until I found out that the states with Capital Punishment had the highest rates of Capital crimes. Hardly a detterent, eh? I realized that people who commit Capital Crimes don't think they'll get caught, and so don't care what the punishment may be.
Of course, then there's the argument of providing the victims' families with "closure". But, with the appeals process taking as long as 20 years, that means the families have to wait 20 years to get "closure". And, after all, isn't this kind of closure more revenge than justice?
Then I read where some Texas prosecutors had ordered all DNA evidence in previous convictions destroyed. Apparently, because an overwhelming majority of convicts on death row who were convicted prior to modern DNA examination methods were being exonerated by DNA evidence. This esposed the Texas prosecutors as over-zealous and more interested in furthering their careers than justice. How many innocent men adn women have been murdered by the state because of over-zealous prosecutors? We have no way of knowing.

So, yes, I changed my views and am now against Capital Punishment.

[jobycom]

14. Debates shape my opinions.

I can't think of something on which I had a firm opinion that I completely changed because of an online discussion. But I have learned facts, and seen other ways of looking at a subject, which has helped to shape my belief on a topic. Happens all the time. I know my basic driving motivations well enough to have an opinion on a topic before I learn all the details (war is wrong, all people are created equal, all humans deserve to be mourned, etc), but the details show me at times where my idea might need to be modified (War is wrong, so in some cases intervening to stop a war may be the least wrong option, for instance).

Also, there are situations, like Katrina and the many failures involved in the response and preparation for the hurricane, where it's impossible to have an informed opinion from the starting gate because our knowledge and awareness of the subject takes some time to develop. How to fix the problems, who is responsible for the problems, etc, can only be determined when enough facts have been gained, and when several ideas have been presented and tested against logic and against those facts. That's especially true of a developing situation, but it can be true of a past event, too, like the JFK assassination. People who have gotten their facts and ideas on some topics from pop movies or one-sided arguments can change their opinions and beliefs as they start to see the whole picture and hear both sides of an argument. I've changed my opinions of some things, not so much because my first opinion was wrong, but because it was incomplete.

That's why I debate. To learn, to inform, to exercise my skills, and to lose more hair. Often I only accomplish the latter, though. But it's like playing pinball. Eventually you will lose, but it's fun to play until you do.

[Az]

15. Yes. All the time n/t

[lectrobyte]

16. Yes.

[enki23]

17. The goal isn't really to change minds, but to change behavior

To make their position seem socially unacceptable. Not just with internet argument, but real world arguments in general. Then, hopefully, to make it *actually* socially unacceptable. It has very little to do with changing their mind, and a lot to do with changing their behavior. For instance, there are a hell of a lot more racist pieces of shit out there than those who will admit they're racist, because it's socially unacceptable to be a racist piece of shit. That's what the "politically incorrect" thing is all about, some people trying to make it socially acceptable again to behave in public like the racist (sexist, violent) all-round assholes they actually are. They're trying to make public discourse safe for their unpopular (but widely held) beliefs.

It's like when I attended a war protest in Baton Rouge Louisiana just before the start of the war. Very few people showed up, and most were from New Orleans rather than from Baton Rouge. A local rightwing (aren't they all?) radio DJ organized a largeish crew of rough looking bikers to intimidate us. Now, there were a lot more people in Baton Rouge who didn't want this nation to go fight in Iraq than would ever make it known in public like that. Most of them were silenced by the social pressure. The very real physical threats and intimidation going on that day were just the icing on the rotten fucking cake.

Short version: Whether it's through social pressure, direct intimidation, or ridicule, the primary goal of real-world argument, here and everywhere else, is simply to shut the other side up. Period.

[jbm]

18. absolutely!

although frequently my opinion has changed because of research I did that was originally intended to support my side of the argument.

My favorite Mark Twain quote is "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

We go through life with our heads full of things we assume to be true because it's what we've been taught, and a vast majority of it is nonsense. Once we can come to terms with that aspect of our existence, changing an opinion becomes something enriching.

[alittlelark]

19. I changed my opinion on Bev Harris due to online debate

[Cobalt Violet]

20. Yes, succession.

There are a lot of good Red Staters and a lot of bad Blue Staters.
I haven't had a relapse in a while.
But 2008 coming up.:evilgrin:

[elehhhhna]

21. Capital Punishment -- hadn't thought much about it but

when I met family in Holland they really had serious questions about it in the US -- and apparently expected me to defend it, which I didn't (I'd just moved to TX & GW had just mocked Karla Faye Tucker, then let her die, and it was BIG news in Europe). I let them talk and began to see how LUDICROUS it is to give the STATE the power to kill its citizens.

Steve Earle made some salient points about this at Camp Casey in Aug '05 which also really hit home. The he sang this song, which floored me and brought home the emotion of such an evil thing...



'Ellis Unit One' lyrics by STEVE EARLE

I was fresh out of the service
It was back in ‘82
I raised some Cain when I come back to town
I left to be all I could be
Come home without a clue
Now, I married Dawn and had to settle down

So I hired on at the prison
Guess I always knew I would
Just like my dad and both my uncles done
And I worked on every cell block
Now, things're goin' good
But then they transferred me to Ellis Unit One

Swing low
Swing low
Swing low and carry me home

Well, my daddy used to talk about them long nights at the walls
And how they used to strap ‘em in the chair
The kids down from the college and they'd bring their beer ‘n all
‘N when the lights went out, a cheer rose in the air

Well, folks just got too civilized
Sparky's gatherin' dust
‘Cause no one wants to touch a smokin' gun
And since they got the injection
They don't mind as much, I guess
They just put ‘em down at Ellis Unit One

Swing low
Swing low
Swing low and carry me home

Well, I've seen ‘em fight like lions, boys
I've seen 'em go like lambs
And I've helped to drag ‘em when they could not stand
And I've heard their mamas cryin' when they heard that big door slam
And I've seen the victim's family holdin' hands

Last night I dreamed that I woke up with straps across my chest
And something cold and black pullin' through my lungs
‘N even Jesus couldn't save me though I know he did his best
But he don't live on Ellis Unit One

Swing low
Swing low
Swing low and carry me home
Swing low
Don't let go
Swing low and carry me home

Copyright © TSRocks

[bananas]

23. Nope. nt

[mvd]

24. Well..

DU helped to cement my position against the death penalty. I used to support in in extreme cases, like with child killers and terrorists. Now, I only support it when a country has no decent means to protect society from dangerous murderers. The U.S. certainly has a decent system with our jails.

I used to be anti-gun rights. I've softened my position on this a bit. I wish we had no guns, but feel like certain restrictions like a limit on purchases per month would help more than a ban.

I also now feel that the Afghanistan war was a failure just like the Iraq war.

[crispini]

25. Yes.

I used to be in the "lighten up" camp when it came to things like the Snickers ad. Thanks to what I have read on DU, I realize that that stuff can be really hurtful.

[grasswire]

26. yes

I fully support the second amendment now. Not that I would ever have a gun. But I was convinced of its necessity.

[Mabus]

27. Yes and I've even apologized when I was wrong

I come to DU and other websites to learn. I admit, it's a big world and I'm not smart enough to have everything figured out. There's a lot going on that makes me a more informed citizen when I've taken the time to listen rather than preach. I try to keep an open mind when I read through threads. I try to be flexible and willing to listen to all sides. In fact, for the first few years that I was on DU I rarely posted because I felt I was still learning so much of what was going on outside my little sphere of knowledge. I was so busy reading in those early years that I rarely noticed who the posters were because I paid more attention to the content than personalities. I took every thread as a brand new conversation with a brand new person. I started noticing posters during the 2004 presidential election cycle. DU changed quite a bit after that and so did my reading habits.

I have never used the "ignore" button and up until the 2004 primary I never used the "alert" button. I was stalked by an overzealous supporter of one candidate and it freaked me out. It made me aware of how vehement and set in stone some people's views were. I'm aware of some posters who continually post updates of their chosen presidential nominee and, depending on who it is, I decide whether to respond. What I mean is this, if I see someone who has shown they are willing to engage in conversation or someone who takes the time to explain stuff in other threads then they have a lot of credibility and I open their threads. There are some people, that if I don't agree with them whole-heartedly (in a binary sort of way) then they will mock, hound you, accuse of being a troll, be dismissive, rude, etc. So, I can choose to spend my time learning and discussing or I can waste my time on someone who only comes here to proselytize. Of course, if it is a Gore thread, you can bet the house that I'm reading that sucker. When I respond on another candidate's thread I try to be encouraging because I believe that everyone brings something to the table. It bothers me when one candidate's supporter comes on with the sole purpose to trash or otherwise undermine another candidate's supporters. That, to me, is rude.

I also try very hard to make sure to get back to someone with the information I told them I would. I can't tell you how many times I've been promised either proof, supporting data or other information by someone who just disappears. I know. No one is perfect but it when it happens over and over again with certain people then I just write-off whatever they say from that point on.

Most of the threads I start are in my state's forum. Some of them are goofy but some of them are announcements of upcoming events, local fundraisers, requests for campaign help, etc. I'm one of those old hippie types who tries to act locally and nationally. All in all, I come here to learn and once in a while to blow off steam in a friendly manner. I read more posts than I'll ever respond to or start.

I have some favorite posters (and, now that I've "outed" myself, this thread is an example of why I tend to open your posts :blush: ). You're someone who gives me things to think about. I also have some favorite topics. If it is about the environment, Sibel, Plamegate, all the presidential hopefuls (I like Gore and I'm not shy about it), KO and a whole host of others, I will make sure to read them. I've made some great friends on DU and in fact, my husband and I are spending the evening with some of our fellow DU'ers (at a Draft Al Gore meetup). I've attended conferences that I learned about on DU. I've participated in events and helped to create some of my own as a result of DU. I have burst out in tears because of what I've read on DU. I've learned things that I wish I could get out of my head. I guess, I get from DU much more than I give. As a result, I'm selfish but I think it's made me a more informed person. Most, if not all, of my exchanges are with the person I'm engaging with and I don't worry about third parties. At the same time, I learn most of my information from being the third party on discussions between others who don't seem to worry a lot about what I might think.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

28. Thanks. Disclosure: I don't think I've ever changed anyone's mind online

(that anyone has admitted to me anyway), and off hand I can't think of any times my mind has been changed, although it wouldn't surprise me if there were a time or two that I just haven't thought of.

As far as my questions about motivations, I generally have little or no expectation of changing the mind of an "opponent". I suppose it's just an issue of expressing my point of view on something, which the internet provides a nice opportunity to do, and maybe influencing someone reading the thread to think critically. :hi:

[Hosnon]

30. Many, many times. I use DU and the internet, in general, to vet ideas. Here's why:

Each one of us sits around thinking about an issue and comes to a conclusion. Due to the limited brain power (1 instead of 100,000), we usually do not see all of the relevant angles/positions.

Post online and "BOOM", the analytical power of thousands of people rips the idea apart and leaves any existing legitimate core.

I love it...and it has altered my views many times.

Edit: Two points on edit. 1) The political diversity on DU is one of its best qualities because each comes from a different place with a different set up assumptions and 2) Mayberry, I'm sure you've influenced me a few times, your name is more than familiar (so either you're an ass or make good points).

[nashville_brook]

31. it's not an agree/disagree thing for me -- i want to change/grow

i think there's a subtext to the question that everyone comes with "their" ideas to an "exchange place" where there's a struggle to either keep those ideas or use those ideas to bring people to "your side."

it's more about discovery for me. i like to share ideas and uncover things that i didn't know. i learn new things everyday which "changes" me a little bit everyday.

ideas like to be let out to play with others. ideas need other ideas to breathe life into them. ideas evolve. people grow.

[cadmium]

32. I dont think I have changed any opinion

on anything fundamental as a result of online debate alone. I changed my opinion on the Terry Schiavo matter and online discussion was one factor.

[eridani]

33. I've come around to understanding 2nd amendment advocates better

I think that small town social controls are very good substitutes for formal regulation in this area, but that when you get to cities and anonymity, you need a more formal setup. I'm no longer knee-jerk pro gun-control.

[treestar]

34. No, only over time and from having a longer and longer

perspective.

[Katherine Brengle]

35. Yes, a couple of times. Long, arduous, painful debates though lol. nt

[undeterred]

36. I became convinced that funny stuff took place on September 11

by reading and asking questions in the forum on this board. I once spent almost a whole week in there. I don't know what the hell happened that day, and I don't have the time to make it my chief pursuit, but I really appreciate the people who are working on this and the information that has been posted there. I was skeptical about both the cover story and the alternative theories to begin with but I had an open mind.

Yeah, I know the Septemner 11 forum is the kid you keep locked in the basement here at DU, but someday all that will change.

[LWolf]

38. Yes.

I have broadened my perspective when offered new information or a different pov in a thoughtful, constructive way.

Unfortunately, I have developed negative reactions and responses to some candidates and positions based on the tone and tactics of those promoting, or attacking, as well.

Before finding DU, I would research candidates and make informed decisions which often involved compromise on my part. Since engaging in campaign debate on DU, there are candidates that I won't vote for because of supporters. I won't be bullied or patronized into a vote. :shrug:

[Cell Whitman]

39. I once gave Bush 41 a pass for jumping out of his plane

during WW2 leaving his crew to die. I thought I couldn't judge a man who jumped from a plane that was belching smoke.

I exchanged email with a WW2 vet who personally talked to other pilots on the mission who said the seas were smooth (as proved by video of Bush being taken aboard the sub) and that the plane was designed to pancake on the water. Bush abandoned his crew and they died.

Not a major issue but it taught me even I can fooled by a Bush.