Debate Policy

A debate policy is a personal rule for when and how to engage in debate. CF / Temple-style debate policies are explicit, public, and fallibilist.

Elliot Temple's debate policy

From elliottemple.com/debate-policy:

"There are three reasons I'll debate people. I want to. I judge it's a good idea. It looks like a path forward."

The policy makes explicit:

• When to engage. Wanting to, judging it's a good idea, or seeing a path forward.
• Why these reasons. They align with Paths Forward and error correction.
• What counts. Public reasons, not vibes.

Why a debate policy

• Default behaviour is wrong. Without a policy, people ignore critics or get drawn into every argument.
• Paths Forward needs a policy. Without one, criticism is filtered by bias rather than content.
• Public policy creates accountability. You can be criticised for the policy.

CF's principles for debate policies

• Be explicit. State the rules.
• Be public. Subject to criticism.
• Be fallibilist.: The policy itself is revisable.
• Be efficient. Time is finite.

Common policies

• "Engage critics with replies that would convince a reasonable bystander." — encourages quality.
• "Engage if there's a path forward." — encourages Paths Forward.
• "Engage only after thinking for 24 hours." — discourages hot takes.
• "Engage publicly, not privately." — encourages transparency.

"Debate Policies" is one of CF's named themes. — criticalfallibilism.com