For everyone that didn't give up!

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

But isn't it, well, difficult to debate thoughtfully around such a passionate thing like football? Particularly when both people are equally as passionate about the same team?

Let's say one person is more skilled at actually debating than someone else, does that somehow make their viewpoint less of an argument or thought worthy? Perhaps they aren't as good at articulating thoughts, facts, and arguments. And to some extent, I think that's where a huge part of the divide, so to speak, exists. To your point though, I think we should be able to debate without bickering, but I doubt it's possible when emotions run high as they often do around Redskins football.

I see your point, but I'm not sure what to conclude from it.

Someone's argument may be really insightful and spot on, but if it's encased in nonsense and fallacy, I'm going to assume that it's nonsensical and fallacious until they can articulate it better.

If someone can't debate well, exhibits poor thinking ability, reasoning ability, or logical thought process and is unable to articulate their point, what should I conclude?

All we have to go on here is how someone articulates their point. If someone rambles on incoherently with poor grammar, poor spelling, fills their "argument" with fallacies and nonsense, what should I conclude?

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...