When it comes to a standard debate among two common individuals, it may seem like a pointless effort in trying to sway said opponents to agree with your side.

For the majority of the time, these arguments and debates come off as quite informal. As that does include great truth, the results and effects of debating even the most illogical individuals are valid in providing often long-term results. As everyone knows, debates arise from at least two standpoints. These standpoints can be two opinions opposing each other, a fact opposing an opinion, a fact opposing a lie, or even two facts opposing each other with different perceptions influencing whichever fact is seen as more prominent. There are three major outcomes when it comes to debating: you could potentially win and sway the audience or your opponent that the opposing viewpoint is incorrect, you could potentially lose, realizing that your opposition has either swayed the audience or yourself that you are wrong, or both factions can give or take which can be seen as a tie. Each conclusion presents a different effect that will stay with even the most stubborn of individuals.

The first outcome is a victory with the debate at hand. You have just swayed the majority of the audience to side with your viewpoint whether coming from the opposing viewpoint or a neutral viewpoint. You have now secured confidence within your viewpoint allowing yourself to not second guess. This is a great effect as many opponents will use lack of confidence against you to attempt to express themselves more profoundly as an attempt to secure a key point through either pure logic, humiliation or any other means. A victory also provides a public recognition that will entail similar strategies and points offered by other individuals who have heard your argument and using it to outline a similar structure to express the same viewpoint allowing it to be shared in a multitude of ways.

The second outcome is a loss with the debate at hand. Either you have personally realized that your viewpoint is wrong or the audience has sided with your opponent no matter where they initially stood. You are now leaving this debate with knowledge, knowledge that can be used to reform your viewpoint into a valid one. The open mind will restructure and perhaps even apply facts and opinions that your opposition used against you in order to affirm a logical standing within your argument. Even if the closed mind does not use what has been offered to them to forge a viewpoint containing a more a valid standing, this mind will be less profound and confident in publicly expressing themselves.

The third and final major outcome is a give and take scenario. You have either learned from your opponent while simultaneously swaying them or you have perhaps lost certain followers while gaining others (including those who have joined a neutral view). In essence, the effects of this scenario can be a mixture of the previous two. The fact of the matter is both factions have suffered a loss and with that will gain knowledge to strengthen and restructure their viewpoint; however it isn't to the extremity of the second scenario because you have also hopefully gained affirmation in certain parts of your argument. Though it is not a win because mixing soup with poison will also have the same effects as drinking straight poison.

In conclusion, positive effects can come from all three major outcomes. As there are also outcomes which branch off from those three, the effects will tend to be aligned with the three presented, at least for the most part. You must also remember that even if your opponent is wrong and you are right, that does not secure a victory within the debate. With that said, it is your duty as an intellectual individual to prevent invalid and incorrect standings, viewpoints, and information from being a belief shared by a mass. The effects of this can be harmful with society being blind from the truth and ignorance automatically siding with the mass simply because it is shared by the mass, but that's a story for another time.