Lunch Chat (10/25): Debating Debate

In keeping with our political theme, I thought that in the next lunch chat we could talk about the role that the presidential (and vice-presidential) debates play — or ought to play — in our deciding who we should vote on. There's been a lot of talk about "who won" certain debates; boxing analogies are common (was it a "victory on points" or a "knock-out"?). Does this talk make sense? What is the relationship between debate and other forms of intellectual discourse? What makes a discussion a debate? And how does any of this matter when it comes to the voting booth?

If you're interesting in debates or politics (or both), stop by the Philosophy Lounge on Thursday at noon for some pizza and (polite) discussion. I swear I'll reign in my use of "zingers". . . .