I feel a good debate is one where both parties can see the reasoning behind both sides of the issue --> When there is an understanding between both parties, the debate becomes less about who is right and more about which side of the topic is truthful or correct. When I enter a debate, often my opinion "rides the fence" somewhere in between, and I typically pick a side that strikes my fancy at the time, or makes sense to me --> I usually just go for the underdog that is either least defended or catching the most flak. A friend of mine (Smelnick on these boards) often accuses me of trying too hard to make everyone happy :lol: --> But I feel it is important to strive for objectivity on all subjects, even if you already a developed opinion on said subject. Spoiler As you may or may not find out, I take pride in my ability to argue for both side of a topic --> Quote me on it later, should I start acting like an idiot. :lol: When it comes to debates and issues (be them political, philosophical, or otherwise), how many of you can honestly say that you have the capability to "ride the fence", and see both sides of the story? How many of you have the capability to argue for either side of an issue, almost-regardless of what the issue is? (I don't mean issues like pro-anarchy, and stuff like that) Should you enter a debate that you don't have an opinion on, how do you pick which side to defend? Spoiler I cannot stand people that must always be right. Nobody is right 100% of the time, and anyone that pretends to be, is a fool (in my opinion :lol.