"You could easily enough make reformed rules which allow for debate about subjects which they don't approve of now. Debates aren't flame wars, and it is quite easy to make this clear. Also a basic list of fallacies could be provided in a guide"
The problem is that you assume that many individuals are genuinely interested in revising their perception of a mentioned issue.
The vast majority of users on this sub-section will quickly resort to Ad-Hominem use in an attempt to "validate" their argument and/or receive support from individuals within their social Internet clique.
Providing a list of logical-fallacies is very unlikely to abolish denial of factual knowledge. |