[the_af]

> The problem with "wanting to lose" in this post is how fake and sentimental that attitude can become, against our best intentions.

Yes. Plus it can seem condescending. I wouldn't want to debate anything with someone adopting some sort of "philosophical master" stance that "through losing" will achieve enlightening. I prefer the other person gets angry if need be, which at least is honest, rather than trying to play some Socratic bullshit on me.

It comes across as "I'm better than you, let me show you that to lose is actually to win".

[pattisapu]

Good point. People smell condescension, and then check out.

The whole thing cools. They'll say just enough to get to the next topic gracefully. The dispute is patched up with something like "we'll agree to disagree" or something like that, in the interest of polite conversation, rather than square-on debate.

In that scenario one does not receive the full force of an opponent's argument. It never got ventilated. An opponent only brings that energy to a debate between earnest people who see themselves -- not their arguments -- as equals.