if your goal is to improve your own argument, then playing devils advocate can be helpful towards that goal

I improve my argument by gathering more information.

Theres multiple ways to improve an argument, you know that right?

Someone can have all of the information they need to come to a correct conclusion and still be misguided

Then they'll find out the hard way when it gets painful for them

And how do they find out that their argument is wrong

When enough people argue them and break down everything they have.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That is why we should argue

People with *real opposing viewpoints*

People learn through pain.

If two people are arguing the same points but one actually believes them, it doesnt make a difference

To me it does

Is your only goal when arguing with someone to convince them of your point of view

Yes

Then thats irresponsible, your attempting to convince people of a point of view that you dont try to falsify

And they're doing the same

We're trying to falsify each other's opinion.

You're saying that the point of debate isnt to come to the most correct opinion possible, you're only concerned with convincing other people of your opinion

Going into a debate, EVERYONE'S objective, is to convince the other guy. That's how debates start.

No it isnt

My objective when going into a debate isnt to convince the other guy, its to discuss ideas and test them to see if they work

Fight breaks out between opinions, you both defend your sides, and a winner comes out. The other guy licks his wounds, and learns his lesson to come back again stronger

Adapt and overcome

So you think people should correct their opinions when they're proven wrong?

Yeah, no shit

So you DO care about coming to the most correct opinion possible, then you agree with my previous statements regarding debating people who dont truely hold the belief they're arguing for

Yes, to your first, no to your second.

I dont think you can hold the first one and not the second one while remaining consistent

Why not? I find people arguing someone else's' opinion disingenuous. I want a real opponent that will suffer actual consequences in their psyche when they lose.

Its irrelevant because if your goal is to come to the most correct opinion possible, whether the person you're arguing with actually believes what they're saying is irrelevant

To you

to you to

https://gyazo.com/dbc07302a43760af12ee7d3b2486eb30

No? I just told you it makes ALL the difference to me if the person legitimately holds their opinion.

Why though

You're just making an ad hominem fallacy

I told you. The stakes are higher. *It's worth it.*

I dont know what that means

I want them to rage quit when they discover they're wrong.

Gotta have heart behind it.