I've been on the internet since '95, ten years less that you. But engaging in these debates I've learned a few things.
It's rare that you ever convince anyone that you are arguing with to change their position. The reason that they are arguing to begin with is that they have a solid opinion of things -- right or wrong.
And yes, most younger people are unserious and illogical -- all talk, little listening. They aren't all like that, but most are. I wasn't exactly a Greek philosopher back then either -- I was out having fun.
But...whether old or young, it's usually the lurkers and not the ones arguing who change their opinions on issues, based on listening to the arguments from both sides. Lurkers have got nothing personal invested and nothing to defend, so its easier for them to reform their ideas.
And people who are open to change and willing to defy the pack are leaders, and the pack can change leaders & ideas on a dime.
Arguments that are civil, are about the issues. Arguments that turn into verbal brawls attract the same kind of crowd that a wrestling match does. Lots of thumbs up and down, but who cares?
When you really have truth on your side, people either hear it or they don't.
Getting your ego out of the way is the hardest part.
[It's rare that you ever convince anyone that you are arguing with to change their position.]
That's not the objective. This is:
"The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true."
--Albert Einstein
"...that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them. "
--Thomas Jefferson
Observe the destruction of Free Discourse is a primary task assigned to the progressive vanguard. Why is that? Hmmm....
