Debate Like A Champion | World Champion Debater Bo Seo (Part 1) 

If people were as reasonable and precise in their communication as Mr Seo, the world would be a much better place.

12:30 is where the lesson begins

Bo Seo is a master debater.

1.5 speed, perfect ✅

I’d like to see him debating with Dr. Jordan Peterson.

In his book he teaches us to avoid using the word “ummm” but here he is constantly using it. Good book Bo, but you must practice what you preach.

Like a champion? Do you mean like Donald Trump just did against Biden, as has been widely acclaimed all across mainstream media? However, I didn't see any of you debate leaders, coaches, judges, as experts on any of the analysis shows.

I like Bo but he keeps saying "Ummm" drives me insane

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🎤 *Introduction and Purpose of the Book* - Introduction to the event and guest speaker, Bo Seo. - Bo Seo's background and his motivation to write the book. - Purpose of the book: "The Art of Disagreeing Well" as a toolkit for enhancing debating skills. 05:11 🌐 *Arguing as a Skill and Responsibility* - Arguing is a skill that can be developed, not just a natural occurrence. - Disagreeing is a craft, work, and an art that requires attention and improvement. - Bo Seo emphasizes the responsibility of individuals, especially those in influential positions, to set examples for healthy public conversations. 11:38 🤝 *Naming Disagreements and Establishing Rules* - Every disagreement should start with an agreement about the rules of the conversation. - Naming the disagreement is crucial to understand the core issues beneath the surface. - Illustration using a parenting example: "Should we send our kids to the local public school?" - exploring the underlying disagreements within this seemingly simple question. 19:36 🧠 *Resolving Disagreements by Addressing Fundamental Issues* - Naming and addressing disagreements within disagreements help avoid misunderstandings. - Resolving fundamental disputes can lead to the resolution of superficial disagreements. - Focusing on the core issues ensures a more effective and constructive resolution of conflicts. Made with HARPA AI

The child may have an opinion also?

WTF. Where is the rest of this discussion: I wanted to learn to debate. Here is a question? Should this content be free or should we pay for it? My first point would be (if I was actually communicating with someone): if I was paying, where is the money going? Is it to an organisation like CNN or is the money going into, say, furthering education for disadvantaged kids. If the latter, paying, say a few quid to develop debating skills and knowing the money is also going to helping people communicate better while advancing knowledge of the world is a good cause. If not, then where is it going? Possibly someone who believes that economic growth should be considered more important than making a more equal society. Then I disagree, as this goes against furthering the education for a more stable society. They may argue, well, economic growth has pulled lots of people out of poverty. I would say, that is correct on a material level which is likely to have other benefits for individuals and perhaps the wider society. On the other hand, is this sustainable and is the growth leading to a happier society. Then I would present my argument that it is not sustainable because of pollution and finite resources, alongside evidence that society is facing increases in the prevalence of mental illness (less happiness). To oppose this argument, they could argue that technology is producing more effective ways of being resourceful and therefore pollution and waste can be eliminated through innovation by companies, which is in their interest to sustain profits. Plus the taxation from growth helps to pay for healthcare and profits mean private companies can pay for staff welfare as it should be in the companies interest. Plus, they may argue that happiness is hard to measure and therefore how do we know for sure that the societies of the world are becoming unhappier? To this I'd say there is plenty of evidence, such as breakdowns, drug use and people who watch too much CNN, which have been found to be strongly linked to inequality, whether material, social, psychological or spiritual. Then I have won the argument, but the world is not ideal and are there alternatives for organising societies. Then another debate can begin.

Debate contests are like amusement parks - they can be fun and exciting, but they don't have much bearing on real life. Winning a debate contest doesn't guarantee success in the real world, which is far more complex and unpredictable. While debate skills are valuable, real-life success depends on many other factors. So enjoy the ride, but don't mistake it for the destination. That's why Bo Seo wins at the contest but he is not a successful politician or businessman.

:(