|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|---|
If there is disagreement, capitalize by staging an entertaining debate that gets ticket revenue. Split ticket revenue equally between debaters so that ticket revenue is more important than winning. Don King, Vince McMahon, and Dana White never fought, but they made big ticket revenue for their clients. Rocky V features a character that's a boxing promoter.
Some see intolerance as virtue and some see it as vice. Glorify the tolerant and shame the intolerant.
Getting ticket revenue requires being respectful of fans from all sides. Build an arena that's comfortable to all sides. Build it and they will come. Be the Colosseum of Rome. Fans from all sides tailgate together before the debate and continue tailgating after the debate. Be the sports bar and rake in revenue.
Be sportsmanlike. Refs should enforce good sportsmanship.
 |
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|---|
We want a clash of titans, not minnows.
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|
You must accept challenges from worthy competition and win. You must face the Devil's advocate. Don't hate the devil's advocate if he kicks your butt. He's doing his job.
You must win on neutral turf, in a fair game.
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|
If you win, you must defend the title against challengers. New data rolls in. Science advances and paradigms change.
If you refuse challenges, then some jerk will declare himself the champion and refuse challenges from you.
 |
|
|---|---|
You need multiple formats of debate, for example:
(*) Neutral debate, with no moderator. Each side gets to invite half the audience.
(*) Seminar. A speaker delivers an argument in detail. The opposition may ask questions, but the speaker is dictator and moderator. The speaker may silence anyone.
(*) Sermon. A speaker delivers an argument in detail, with no interruptions. The presentation is a polished work of art, like a movie.
This totals 5 debates. A neutral debate, a seminar for each side, and a sermon for each side.
A seminar has 2 stages. In stage 1, questions are allowed but they should be synergistic with the speaker's case. It's inappropriate to attack the speaker's case during stage 1. Stage 2 is for attacks on the speaker's case.
The sermons should happen first, then the seminars, then the neutral debate. By the time of the debate, both teams should be aware of the other team's case, and of the other team's rebuttals to your case. If you don't do this, you're wasting the time of the audience.
 |
|---|
Moderators are rarely neutral. Do away with them and use chess clocks to limit the total time that each speaker may speak.
The Lincoln-Douglas debates didn't have a moderator and there was ample time for rebuttal. Each side got 1.5 hours to speak and there were 9 debates. If you fib, the other candidate had plenty of chances to zap you for it.
The newspapers printed what each candidate said. Partisan newspapers tended to polish the grammar of their candidate and leave the other candidate's words raw, but they would still print the other candidate's words. Today, censorship abounds.
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|
Embrace complexity and raise the level of the game.
You can't solve complex problems with simple tools.
If a problem is simple, you have to prove it's simple, and this usually requires complex analysis. You can't escape complexity.
"Complexity deniers" refuse to accept the existence of complexity. They assume that everything that matters is easily understood. They refuse to study and are therefore negligent.
 |
|---|
Cherry picking is considering only a subset of the data. Know all the data. Be a forest, not a tree.
 |
|---|
You want to win convincingly. If you have no choice but to assume, lean to the positive. Lean toward complexity, not simplicity. Use the "steel man" strategy.
To straw-man is to assume guilty until proven innocent.
 |
|---|
You must respectfully allow the opposition to rebut your statements.
Chances are that the foe has already published rebuttals to your arguments before the debate. If you don't study them, you are negligent. You're wasting the audience's time.
 |
|---|
Mario Andretti: If things seem under control, you're just not going fast enough.
If things seem well understood, you're just not discovering fast enough. If things are going well, things feel chaotic and there is little consensus.
A field should have frequent paradigm revolutions, otherwise it's stagnant.
It's okay to challenge the consensus. Science requires it.
Science values discoveries that are ahead of their time. Be far ahead of the pack.
Don't fret about what's right or wrong today. What matters is knowing the right direction to go. You want your hard work to pay off.
 |
|---|
Thomas Payne: He who dares not offend cannot be honest.
It's more important to be honest than inoffensive.
Don't be a wuss. Don't be a crybully. Science doesn't care if you're offended.
Science needs both theory and experiment, and there needs to be synergy between them. Experiments alone are not enough. Facts alone are not enough. If someone is bullying you with facts, chances are that his theory is weak.
Theory tells you where to look for better facts. Theory doesn't just interpret experiments. It guides them as well.
Fact checkers usually cherry pick.
Fact checkers are widely mocked. If fact checkers are your best card, you should fold. Find better cards.
Wizards check facts themselves.
It's not about right or wrong. It's about specific or vague. If you are vague, you are not even wrong.
You are "more than right" if your theory proves to be worth study.
What counts is knowing the direction of the next discovery. You want your hard work to pay off. If you don't have good guidence from theory, your hard work will become obsolete.
 |
|---|