Sound Debate (Not)

The principles of debate are almost more important than the debate itself. In my own university education, these principles were "drilled into one". But today, debate has become ideologically charged, so that these principles, when one raises them, are very often problematic. There is no shortage of examples:

• A debate concludes, and the camera is about to be turned off. A participant drops a bombshell and everyone is cut off.
• A debate includes only acolytes. There isn't the diversity of thought for a meaningful exchange.
• A participant debates in public with classified information. One doesn't have access to the information, and cannot verify it or even assess it.
• There is a debate about values. One asks what the axioms are on which these are based, and everyone freezes.
• Any debate at all may be interpreted as an attack, rather than a healthy exchange of ideas or an ongoing dialogue.
• Or one enters a public debate. Before any meaningful exchange takes place, there are accusations of "Spy!"

OBSERVATION: There are many more examples, which together reveal a flood of debate which does not rest on sound principles of debate, and make it difficult to make a meaningful contribution.