What Matters More?

In a debate, or argument, or whatever, which of these would matter more?

 

Facts. as long as I win I don't care about the other guy's feelings :)

 

Well it really depends on the context of the situation. Sometimes emotion is more compelling than fact which could convince the audience or in a smaller conflict ease the tensions and show empathy for another. Facts can be more useful in proving certainty. For example, a court case would require evidence and fact to truly convict. Facts could also help show that one side is right whereas the other is not.

 

Screw feelings.

 

Facts, since it's about a subject. An opinion is a feeling. Feelings should be put aside in a debate.

Okay back to normal crazy mode instead of serious tsundere mode xD

 

Feelings are more powerful than a bunch of stupid facts, if you're passionate enough about something, you'll convince the audience more than if you're boring and just saying random facts.

 

Although both are important, facts are more necessary for a legitimate argument.
Example:
Person 1: My favourite song is... The Ectasy of Gold, therefore, it is the best in my opinion.
Person 2: Actually, Gangnam Style is the most viewed song on YouTube, showing its popularity.

However, this is left to personal opinion.

 

Too vague to be totally sure, but I'll just go with my gut and say facts.

 

Facts win in court

 

Facts

 

Facts

 

A mix of both. You cant win just by saying facts, just as you can't win with just feelings. Having feelings backed up by facts makes one of the strongest arguements ever. But facts are still more important.

 

If you are arguing over a topic (like the legitimacy of 3rd wave feminism), facts wins out over feelings when it comes to proving that the wage gap does not exist, and that rape rates on American campuses are comparable to the Congo. This is just an example, and lets not turn this thread into an argument about feminism.

 

I'm confused by this. Feelings and facts are polar opposites really. In a debate do you mean feelings as like not trying to hurt someone feeings or what? Because feelings and facts are both 100% right either way. A feeling is a synonym for opinion. And opinions are never something you can disprove or call wrong. For example I can say "I feel sad" and there is no way for you to disprove that, in fact if I say a feel sad then I am sad and it becomes a fact. feelings are emotionly based where facts are based on concrete evidence. I can't say "I feel like Jerry and Harry aren't YouTubers" because they are and that's not an emotion. So you can have non valid feelings if they aren't an emotion. But both are equally as important

 

You can actually disproove many opinions with facts. For example, if I said "I believe that 2 + 2 = fish", you can disproove my opinion by showing that 2 + 2 =4, even including sources. Things like emotions can't be disprooven because they're well, emotions. It's the most basic inner thought and there's just no way to disproove that with the situation or topic at hand. Opinions & beliefs are fair game, though.

 

Yes that's what I was kind of trying to say. But then it's not really an opinion because it is off a hard fact. 2+2 will always equal 4 and isn't subject to change. You can only have a true valid opinion on a dynamic topic with different view points.

 

Facts m8 facts

 

If you play your opponent's feelings and weaknesses in a debate you can achieve more than when you just say some facts.

Also, if you are charismatic, it doesn't matter what you say, for people will believe it anyway ^_^

 

They are nearly equal in importance in the long run because they function together. There's three parts: facts, credibility and emotions (logos , ethos, and pathos).

However, emotions give you a better advantage in the beginning because now the audience is more interested due to the emotional involvement. Throwing facts at people mean nothing unless the audience is interested.

Also facts mean nothing without credibility.

Also

All this could be total bs for all an audience knows. Pathos can play a role in ethos and allow you to say this without much doubt in the audience, since the audience is invested in the point being made. They will agree with anything supporting the point that sounds remotely correct.

In all, emotional appeals don't depend on credibility as much as facts do.

 

Emotions, without them we'd be nothing, yes facts are helpful, but imagine if there weren't any. Imagine that we could think whatever we wanted without having a yes or no answer. Debate and both sides would win.

Just saying...