system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: You should NOT try to win a debate or argument.

Many people go into debates about politics or whatnot with the intention of "winning" the debate. What this usually means is making the opposition change their view on a matter. If you search "How to win a debate", you'll find countless articles giving tips and even articles about how to win debate competitions. A debate is seen as a sort of contest by many people.

However, going into a debate with this mindset is inherently close-minded. It means that to concede that the opposition is correct is to admit defeat. The purpose of an argument is to learn from opposing viewpoints and morph your own ideas as new concepts are introduced to you.

If you are so convinced that you are correct that you are going into an argument with the intention of "winning it", it defeats the purpose of even debating an issue in the first place. All people should be open to the fact that they may be wrong about certain things.
gpt
I'd argue there's a distinction to be made between an argument/debate and a discussion.

In a discussion, you might have a hypothesis or some underlying beliefs, but you don't have a fully formed opinion, and neither does the other participant. You're both discovering the subject as you discuss.

In a debate or argument, you have a fully formed position. However, in order to engage in a good faith argument, you must be willing to reconsider the underlying bases for your position as you explain and consider counterarguments.

It's just a different forum, but in a debate, you have to at least argue under the pretense that your initial position is correct in order to prepare adequate counterarguments.