To attempt to win (and thereby to attempt to cause the other to lose) is already to have forgotten the main purpose of argumentation, which is to articulate and thereby risk resolving those points on which we have disagreement; in other words, to attempt to persuade the other, and to allow ourselves to be persuaded also. When those who are participating in a debate bring notions of winning and losing to the fore, they corrupt the chances of a genuine dialogue between their respective viewpoints, because they will be willing to compromise on the productivity of the discourse if that is what is required to ensure that the audience knows they are winning. In contrast, a debate which arises between two individuals neither of whom project a frame of winning and losing has a much higher chance of facilitating authentic communication, because there is much less motivation to engage in performative nonsense in order to assert your dominance over the other. In short, trying to win sort of makes you less reasonable in dialogue.

Read more here: medium.com/@1nsinq/the-curse-of-debate-bro-culture-a4310946c8ca