Guidelines to reduce Partisanship and Polarization Explained

[AgnosticBoy]

Based on a recent experience on another forum, I feel the need to explain my guidelines for reducing partisanship and polarization on the forum. These guidelines would mostly apply in the Debate sections of the forum.

One way a site or a particular discussion can become partisan and polarizing is if one or all participants try to make the issue about which side you're on as opposed to focusing on the logic and evidence behind a view. Partisanship and polarization can also happen when members are more interested on supporting their side than on getting to the truth no matter the implications. I don't have a solution that would resolve this completely and perfectly, but seeing that having a non-partisan environment is one of the themes of the forum, I definitely want to have some working guidelines to limit such behavior and set a tone. The alternative is to have debates where you feel like you're talking to a militant and/or close-minded Democrat, atheist, Christian, Republican, a pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian supporter, or even just your typical untrustworthy politician.


Thankfully, a lot of the tactics that a partisan person would use are also logical fallacies when used in a debate. So having rules in place that would cover the type of fallacies that partisan people would engage in helps. Here are some examples of that which I've made mention of in the rules (the red font):

Debates should not involve any proselytizing or promoting views, unsupported claims, red herrings, misdirections, misrepresenting someone's position, challenging or dismissing someone's opinion (does not apply to opinions that are shown to be false), ad hominems, too much rhetoric and commentary.

Going into more detail on each from my Rules and Guidelines:

Misdirection or red herring is a type of diversionary tactic used in debates. According to Wikipedia, is "introducing a second argument in response to the first argument that is irrelevant and draws attention away from the original topic (e.g.: saying “If you want to complain about the dishes I leave in the sink, what about the dirty clothes you leave in the bathroom?”). It is harder to determine because it can sometimes involve intent.

Rhetoric and commentary in debate sections
Please keep rhetoric and side commentary at a minimum in Debate sections (Discussion sections allows for personal commentary, opinions, etc). The main focus in the debate section should be on the logic and evidence for or against a position that deals with the topic. This standard is in place because too much rhetoric/personal commentary may come from mostly one side and can create a partisan/polarizing environment, like CNN or Fox News.

I'm open to adding more rules or modifying pre-existing rules just as long as they go towards eliminating or reducing partisanship and polarization.