http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/arts/people-argue-just-to-win-scholars-assert.html?pagewanted=all
It's been commonly assumed that debating helps intellectual thinkers advance in society but a very interesting new theory says otherwise. It's purpose according to a cognitive psychologist is that it's purpose was for one group to defeat another. I suppose this makes sense as it takes place in a social setting. Humans do have a need to belong and some seek on reforming beliefs of others. Debating also introduces confirmation bias or choosing evidence that supports your beliefs while ignoring the rest. Reasoning helps win an argument, but not find Truth. Hugo Mercier also provides evidence demonstrating that humans are bad at reasoning. Logical reasoning alone can provide justified beliefs, but not the best ones. Collective group thinking is more favored towards finding the Truth because we are better at evaluating arguments rather than producing them individually.
Why i stopped debating is because it's focused too much on semantics and confirmation bias. People are more worried about boosting their debating skills than seeking the Truth. There are millions of possibilities out there and debating typically restricts them to a few positions. Debating may have been useful in Socrates day, but science has now taken over the world.
