A complete and total waste of time for those whom are TRULY «intellectual» like this author...
https://agingcapriciously.com/2016/03/06/debate-versus-discussion-why-debates-are-a-waste-of-time/

It doesn't matter how you call it – when two people with different opinions meet, those two opinions will clash in one form or the other. This clash can be resolved in two different ways:

1. Violence

Just scare or kill the other side. The winner takes it all.

2. Debate

This is what we use to avoid violence, because we are civilized beings.

A debate can be won because there are rules that tell us when the debate is over.

There are also two ways of how a debate is resolved:

1. The democratic way

This means one side can gather a majority behind it. This simulates violence, because we say: If we were violent, the majority would win. The minority surrenders voluntarily in order to avoid the possible violence.

2. The scientific way

This means the side that is factually or logically correct wins the debate, even if it doesn't have a majority behind it. In order for this way to work, there must be a consensus of how truth can be discovered.

Example: A scientist discovers a truth that's contradicting the current scientific consensus. But as there's a consensus about how truth can be discovered, the scientist must only prove that he did it the right way. The debate would revolve around whether he used the right methodology, and if he did, he would win despite being a minority.

Most people on this planet are used to either direct violence or the democratic way. They are not interested in truth, but in creating majorities to win over minorities instead, because they still think in violence.

And I agree: Democratic debates are a waste of time, because the majority can always be wrong.

➡️ https://www.farsightprime.com/forums/general/74199-how-to-know-the-truth