Possibly scientific debates, but might be more like next generation discarding one of the views. Which is similar to winning because the other side diez.
Conversation
This is the main case I'm thinking of actually. Famous idea (Kuhn I think) that a new paradigm is accepted because the old academics resisting it die out, not because they're convinced
2
1
Max Planck said "science progresses one death at a time" so I guess there is a case to be made there.
1
Another similar in spirit example is legislation. Left and right rarely work together. They just move their policy agendas forward when they have majority.
Consistently losing ideologies drop out of the legislation game rather than accepting the winning view.
1
To return to your original assertion, I cannot think of any examples that were 'won' by default in any domain. Defeat postponed is not victory either.
1
broader point is finite vs. infinite game (play to win/play to continue the game). Consequential debates are almost by definition infinite game. There is no ultimate victory or defeat. Only tactical ones. There's only staying or quitting longer term.
1
Perhaps, but only abstractly. Hence my tedious insistence on concrete examples. To add: Carse's thinking is not well-formed, to put mildly.
1
Likewise I think it's your position that needs examples 😂. If I squint all examples appear to fit my model at least approximately.
Marital disagreements are a good clear example. Most are resolved by one spouse deciding to accept without conceding. 'This too shall pass'
1
Well, I wasn't the one making the original assertion, so the onus is perhaps on you.
In marital disagreements I prefer to defer, because mine are (happily enough) not terribly serious or consequential, which I gather was the topic ;)
1
I don't buy that burden of proof heuristic. It's on the side making the tighter claim. I've provided a few but I see no clear examples of yours yet.
Climate change might be one soon, where skeptics are won over by accumulating evidence
You don't buy the idea that broad assertions should come with proof?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Regarding examples, I think you're mistaking absence of negatives from my side as presence of positive from yours. PS On climate change, here's hoping, aye!


