<p>I'm watching this debate, and someone gave a statistic. Normally, everyone just goes along with whatever, assuming this statistic exists and is true. But how do we know that? Most people don't take the responsibility to google it. And even if someone did, and there was a paper about this statistic- how do we know that someone didn't just type up a random paper? How do we know a study every happened?</p>
<p>we don’t</p>
<p>10char</p>
<p>I assume if they’re citing some kind of reputable university study (and a lot of times they aren’t, most likely), there would be proof that that study actually happened. It’s fairly easy to distort statistics, obviously. </p>
<p>(How do we know anything at all, really? Even our own brains can lie to us. How can we possibly trust other people?)</p>
<p>What stressedouttt said. But to build off it, I think that we have to assume some are telling the truth. If we were to accept that everyone is lying to us, we would not accomplish anything.</p>
<p>Hey!</p>
<p>Thats how i win my arguments!!! (a major University study said…)</p>
<p>78% of statistics are made up on the spot</p>
<p>^ I thought it was 70? whatevs</p>
<p>@qchat my point made</p>
<p>The Kennedy missile gap comes to mind</p>
<p>statistics can be useful when you’re trying to make predictions or determine probablilites for, say, business, but not for debate.
not only can they be false, but there’s no way that they can apply to all of mankind ever or mankind to come. typically, they only are for specific sample of people who live in the same area (e.g. America), which isn’t helpful if you’re debating something universal.
plus, it doesn’t provide an explanation for anything. the number of people who are x may also tend to be y, but so what? what’s the connection? where is the proof or reasoning that one causes the other?</p>
<p>We don’t know that anything is ever the truth. This is especially true on the internet. I have learned not to believe anything 100% unless it is from a trusted site/person or it is explained well enough.</p>
<p>One of the most fun parts of debating is being able to make up absolutely any statistic and not have people question it. The statistics aren’t the point anyway, but if the opposing team does ask about it, they are detracting from the point of the debate and may get marked down :D</p>
<p>Uh, try fact-checking.</p>
<p>@UKgirl but… that’s awful. that’s why I don’t like debate competitions. they’re not about growth and actual discussion on the issue (which would be the whole point of having the debate in the first place), but about “winning.” that’s a horrible way of thinking when you’re trying to talk about something serious</p>
<p>unrelated, but i’d really like to thank everyone for debating religion on my other thread, which led to the thread being closed down.</p>
<p>^Sorry 
Although I was more talking about homphobia than religion</p>
<p>@stressed The point of debate competitions is debating, not about the issue at all. The point for me is enjoying it, not winning. It’s just about how you can present things and argue them, and having a random statistic to back up a point sounds good, but doesn’t mean anything. I haven’t put this very well, but the point of competitive debating has never been and shouldn’t be about the issue at all.</p>
<p>@UKgirl- gosh, it wasnt your fault (not that i can remember)! i think it was mostly some other users though…seriously disappointing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s terrible.</p>
<p>How is that terrible? Have you been to a debate club? In my school’s debate club, the two debating are randomly given a side to defend.</p>
<p>^It’s the same for us. It’s about developing skills to be able to use in the future to argue things you actually care about or may be able to do something about. I’ve had to debate on things I have no opinions on, such as abolishing the power of the veto in the UN security council, and I’ve had to debate against my own strong beliefs, such as about equal marriage.</p>