re "evolving tilts"
I sure did read this wrong the first time.
A testimony to the power of attending closely, there...
My own tilts have definitely evolved in all sorts of areas through exposure to other people's perspectives and lived experiences and responses to those experiences... but maybe "debate" isn't quite the the right word for the mechanism of my evolution...
I'm not a black and white person and I change my opinions based on what I learn; my point I guess that I must not have expressed well, was that my opinions have never been changed through a debate. They have been changed through reading studies, meeting people, personal experiences etc, but never through a debate. I've certainly had useful discussions with people that have been illuminating regarding social or political issues, but no one has ever changed my mind through debating me. So I'm curious if others have had their minds changed in a debate with someone.
Yes. But only when debating with intelligent, conscientious debaters, not with people who are just shouting their opinions to see if they can out-shout the other side.
For example, my religious conversion took place after an 18 month debate with my brother in the form of 1-2 well thought out and heartfelt emails per week, back and forth, between the two of us. Book readings and recommendations from both of us to the other, etc.
... these kind of sustained, back-and-forth, substantive, nuanced encounters, both IRL and in this <<massively unusual and precious space here on WTM>> have supported the evolution of my tilt in a number of areas.
I wouldn't call it "debate," though. More like "mutual exploration" or something, delving into differences.
And part of what that longer, slower exploration allows is the creation of a degree -- particularly in face-to-face relationships of course, but even I think on line with repeated "encounters" with the same regulars over long periods of time, is that we can begin to "recognize" each other and develop a sense of trust over time, enough to make a sort of space for...
Well, I don't think I've ever changed my mind in the middle of a debate, but I certainly have changed my mind because of what I heard in a debate.
And when you hear people's stories, they aren't always "polite". When you deny people's negative experiences which are a result of a belief that you hold strongly, you cannot expect that person to only say polite things to you. That's asking too much, it isn't a fair fight, and you aren't really open to learning anything.
... this. So that the expression of anger and pain doesn't bring the conversation to a screeching flouncy halt...
...as does often happen in what I consider to be "debates," and usually shuts them right down. The defining difference between "mutual exploration" vs "debate" is, to me, that in "mutual exploration," strong anger and pain can be expressed without terminating the process.