Set a debate goal
This is what is being aimed for -- the success condition. The goal stays visible to act as the north star.
Reasonable Debate is a simple and free solution for making debates constructive. It forces structure to dialogues, prevents talking past each other and leads to pinpointing the exact disagreement.
Build argument trees in a visual workspace that mirrors the reasoning journey.
Iteratively break terms in a proposition down until semantics are clarified.
Progress in a sequence that adheres to logic, promotes transparency and prevents spiralling.


No Resolution
Debates are left feeling like nothing was settled. No one changes their mind, and the real point of disagreement remains unclear -- the very thing that would need to be addressed to make progress.
Guaranteed Resolution
Either a sound argument is built, valid and granted by the opponent, or you bottom out at the very heart of the contention.
Chaotic Dialogue
Conversations spiral into scattered monologues, with points traded but never explored deeply enough to reach resolution -- leaving each feeling their arguments were never really addressed.
Systematic Dialogue
The tempo is deliberately slowed down and the dialogue will follow a rigid sequence, where you are forced to lock into one topic, at any one time. Everyone knows where they are in the debate, and whether each reply is on topic.
Vagueness
Vague terms are making it difficult to directly engage with positions, and arguments quickly pile up into a muddle of disconnected points.
Transparency
Before entering argumentation, attaining shared understanding of the claim is prioritised. Once reached, arguments are organised in a clear argument tree, where every line of reasoning is transparent and auditable.
Wasted Time
We unknowingly waste time debating because differences in terminology hide real agreement, or discussing the content of arguments that were never validly structured to begin with.
Efficiency
A focus on ensuring mutual understanding before argumentation, and checking argument structure for logical validity before analysing content.
This is what is being aimed for -- the success condition. The goal stays visible to act as the north star.
Enter the core claim under discussion so everyone rallies around the exact wording -- no moving targets.
Break down terminology until there is common understanding--it may even be found there is nothing in dispute!
The opponent explicitly decides whether to grant each proposition, so it is always clear where support is needed.
Add premises, establish validity, and develop the argument tree exactly where contention remains.
The procedure will converge to either an argument glowing 'sound' when it is valid and has premises that are granted as true; otherwise to the exact heart of the contention!
Open Reasonable Debate and experience a guided, visual approach to structured argumentation.