You've helped them one at a time. The real understanding is how the ideas CONNECT — teach that next.
Steel (steelmanning — the strongest version of what the other side would say if you let them) ×Reply (civil rebuttal — 'I disagree because,' addressing the argument, not the person)
A debater knocks down a silly version of the other side and declares victory. What do Steel and Reply say went wrong?
Steel then says: “The best way to win a debate is to rebut the silliest version of your opponent's view.” — is that right?
The link: build the strongest opposing view first, then reply to that.
Steelman it, then answer the strong version.
Weigh (evidence-evaluation — sources have positions, evidence has limits; credibility as calibration) ×Yield (changing your mind in light of evidence — concession as craft and intellectual courage)
Halfway through a debate you realize the evidence favors your opponent. How do Weigh and Yield guide you?
Weigh then says: “Changing your mind in a debate always means you lost and should be avoided at all costs.” — is that right?
The link: honest weighing of evidence is exactly what earns a courageous concession.
Weigh it fairly, and change your mind when it points the other way.
Capstone — hold one good debate together
Three habits of a strong debater. Bring in the cast member for each.
Build your case: claim, warrant, evidence. Who?
Who do you bring in?
Steelman the opposing view. Who?
Who do you bring in?
Change your mind if the evidence says so. Who?
Who do you bring in?
The synthesis: build your case, steelman theirs, and yield to better evidence — how a good-faith debater argues to learn, not just to win.
