When the 'Debate' is Lost
The low value of emotionally-charged reactions in arguments
When the Debate is Lost
by Jennifer Eisenreich
August 31, 2024
A guest piece for Communication Intelligence
The forums were the embodiment of life in ancient Rome. Their marble steps and columns provided the backdrop for moral, philosophical and political discourse the same way our glowing screens do today. Thousands would gather to hear the news, to be entertained or informed.
“When the debate is over, insults become the loser’s tool.”
Even with the instant ability to fact check a quote, we retweet (reX?) and paste quotes as long as they fall in line with our argument. There is no evidence that Socrates spoke about “losers” but that doesn’t mean the quote isn’t true.
In ancient Athens, debates gave breath to intellectual life. Socrates, a relentless questioner, forced his opponents to confront their own ignorance. His method, the elenchus, was designed to strip away pretenses to uncover the truth.
What happens when the truth is elusive and an argument slips through one’s fingers like sand? That’s when the temptation to hurl an insult becomes too great to resist.
The venues may have changed — trade marble steps for a gleaming studio soundstage — but the dynamics remain the same.
Think about the last time you witnessed or participated in a heated online debate. When one party ran out of logical arguments, what came next? More often than not, they resorted to name-calling, sarcasm or outright insults. It’s as if the loss of intellectual ground creates a vacuum that insults rush in to fill.
Key research in communication and psychology backs up that when people feel their position is indefensible, they experience a threat to their self-esteem (Steele, 1988; Sherman & Cohen, 2006).
Rather than conceding or refining their argument, instead they lash out, hoping to undermine their opponent’s credibility or distract from their own weakness. Insults, in this context, become a defense mechanism, a way to salvage pride when logic fails.
But the fact is that insults don’t just damage the person to whom they’re aimed, they reflect poorly on the person who uses them. An insult is a white flag disguised as a dagger (could-be-Nietzsche-quote). It signals not strength, but surrender and says, “I’ve got nothing left in my arsenal, so take this.”
And just like that, the pursuit of truth is abandoned.
The next time you find yourself watching or participating in a debate, whether in person or the comment section, remember this: stick to the argument. Resist the urge to throw shade (or tomatoes), even when it feels justified. Keep Socrates’ spirit alive, not by quoting him incorrectly, but by embodying the values he championed.
If you have the truth on your side, you won’t need to resort to insults. If you don’t, the most viral-worthy insult won’t save you.
In the end, the real victory in a debate is about staying true to the pursuit of learning and understanding, even if it means rethinking what was once believed. If that doesn’t convince you to choose silence over slight, consider this: a temper tantrum has never made someone more attractive or electable, whether in ancient Athens or on Facebook. The same holds true for togas, but that’s another article.
As political debate season ensues, make the radical decision to put down your phone while you watch. Listen well, and learn from the participants. Allow yourself to think your own thoughts and feel your own feelings, instead of reading one-off, knee-jerk comments online.
You might be surprised who you end up quoting.
Jennifer Eisenreich spent 24 of her 30 years in education as a principal and still communicates with many of her former students and their families. Founder and CEO of Shift Show Communication, she helps leaders who want to better connect with their teams.
* Steele, C. M. (1988). "The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self," Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 261-302.
* Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2006). "The psychology of self-defense: Self-affirmation theory," In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 183-242.