CV and mad panic behaviour

[LP]

I feel this debate covers two areas that are very loosely defined, both have boundaries that are highly malleable subject to a political or philosophical position!

I remember being part of a university debate about aliens, of course whoever gets to speak first gets to define the debate, and we defined alien in a non-classical way. This tactic is used widely in the media, social or professional, making use of ambiguity to influence opinion without clearly defining the frame of reference. It results in anarchy, and in my opinion outside of a competitive debating framework it is an invalid tactic to frame any political or social discussion.

The biggest problem in social media is that perspectives are not easily or clearly communicated, and there is no will to fix it, because it's built on a the premise that the poster's has an opinion that is valid and correct in their own frame of reference.