The latest presidential debate was probably one of the last chances for President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden to meet and argue their cases in front of a nationwide audience. Both the President and the former Vice President acted calmer and more conscious than ever before and both put forward sound arguments to describe their programs in order to convince Americans to vote. But while the two politicians, and many others like them around the world, are clearly becoming better at handling a political debate, we should also become better at analyzing one, especially in the midst of the coronavirus crisis.
Difficult times often call for difficult decisions, and only the best policymakers may be capable of making them. That is precisely why voting during a crisis like the current coronavirus pandemic is no easy task and may require citizens to improve their analyses of political debates.
Beyond Emotional and Rational Thinking
While emotional thinking has always played a lead role in politics, over the course of our history we have come to rely more on rational decision-making. Although we know that feelings can alter facts and even lead to biased information processing, scientists recently proved that emotion is much more than a simple tool that can be used to manipulate and change political views. “Political engagement elicits emotionality about politics, and emotion interacts with understanding and motivation to produce its greatest impact on the behavior of those citizens who are the most politically sophisticated,” researchers say.
As companies around the world have come to rely on empathy as an essential trait for numerous employees, we should probably consider our own emotions, as well as those of the political actor in question, when analyzing a political debate or speech.
Fact-checking Is More Important than Ever
We live in a faced-paced digital world that has recently been swept by a dangerous pandemic. As a result, our attention span is narrowing because we need to digest more and more information. “Our data only supports the claim that our collective attention span is narrowing. Therefore, as a next step, it would be interesting to look into how this affects individuals, since the observed developments may have negative implications for an individual’s ability to evaluate the information they consume,” researchers warn. While it may be more difficult to keep up with new information, especially when watching a political debate, fact-checking is one way to make sure we stay correctly informed.
Fact-checking actually means examining the information we heard during a debate in order to determine its veracity and accuracy. One of the benefits of fact-checking is the fact that it can be done after the debate, proving that statements like “The coronavirus spikes are in red states,” as former Vice President Joe Biden said, or “We’ve rounded the corner on coronavirus – it’s going away,” as President Donald Trump said, are ultimately false.
Developing Our Critical Thinking
Critical thinking has always been an important aspect of Western societies and the political stage is no exception to the rule. However, while critical thinking can be learned in childhood and adolescence, adults may have a difficult time adjusting and experimenting with alternative ways of thinking and acting. The process involves the careful examination of all facts before forming an opinion, which usually means we have to let go of our own misconceptions along the way. When watching a political debate we should analyze the facts presented by those involved, but also take note of our own assumptions and ideas.
One way of making sure we put our critical thinking to good use is to identify valuable arguments, even when we disagree with them or we dislike the politician who brought them up. Another way is by identifying weak ideas, even when these support our own beliefs or biases. To sum up, when watching a political debate, we should always analyze ideas for what they are.
Some say the final presidential debate came too late to influence numerous voters, since more than 56 million U.S. citizens had already voted by October 24. However, the different ways of analyzing a political debate are useful not only for those who are yet to do their civic duty but also for all citizens who plan to hold future politicians accountable for their promises.
