Ask Lemmy

26730 readers

1652 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics.

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

In a debate, what's it called when you pretend to agree with a point you don't actually agree with, because you think it will make the person more open to agreeing with you on other points? (monyet.cc)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/asklemmy

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The title of the question is worded in a way that I will assume we already know the position of whoever we are debating. If not, how could we else pretend to agree with their point?

So, we have two opposing views:

You know that I believe A to be true
I know that you believe B to be true

Then it is neither manipulative or in bad faith to "try on" the opposing view. How else can we learn more, if we are not open to understand or empathize? To answer your question, it's called being the devil's advocate:

a person who expresses a contentious opinion in order to provoke debate or test the strength of the opposing arguments. "the interviewer will need to play devil's advocate, to put the other side's case forward"

[–] meco03211 2 points 1 year ago

I feel like devil's advocate is the opposite. It's taking the opposite stance you truly believe in order to debate someone you agree with. OP seems to be asking more specifically about taking a stance you don't agree with to argue against someone you disagree with.