### You are viewing a page indexed by search engine. All comments on the topic are put together without order and may be confusing to read. To see organized discussion click here. ###

I don't find how it could be dishonest to defend an idea one personally disagrees with. A debate is defined as a formal discussion on a particular topic. The goal of a debate is arguing point-of-views in a formal manner. A person's personal opinion on the matter is irrelevant if the argument used in the debate is still a valid one. The important thing is not using false information to defend your position or make the position more credible.Maybe it's dishonest to defend an idea one personally disagrees with. Unlike with debate where it is a sign of weakness to change one's position, in dialogue it is acceptable and even expected. Dialogue is a mutual inquiry which assumes that many people have pieces of answers and that cooperation can lead to a greater understanding. Dialogue remains open-ended and does not require conclusion or 'winning' of one side. Dialogue increases a chance that participants will change their opinions. Doing mental exercises is good, but dialogue in addition strengthens the art of listening, understanding other viewpoints, communicating, etc. These skills seem to be essential in current confrontational and volatile world. Although a good mental exercise, overall effect of practicing debates can be negative. Debate is oppositional instead of collaborative and it is based on proving another side wrong instead of finding a common understanding. Debate assumes a single right answer and by doing that promotes a close minded attitude with a determination to be right. Because debates can be more engaging they are very useful in school environments. Students are randomly given points of views they need to defend and that is a good mental exercise. Dialogue vs debate.