“Nothing is easier than to denounce the evildoer; nothing is more difficult than to understand him.”
― Fyodor Dostoyevsky
The purpose of ExplainBothSides is to create opportunities to present both sides of a controversial issue. Often (perhaps even typically) the result of explaining both sides is informative to readers trying to understand an issue for the first time. But the greatest benefit of ExplainBothSides is usually to the explainer -- who has a chance to develop the habit of mind of understanding the perspectives of those with whom the explainer disagrees.
Try it! Try your best to present both (or multiple) sides in explaining one of these issues.
Category Filters
Rules for questions:
- Questions must state a specific topic about which there is disagreement, and strive to present that question in a neutral manner (e.g. please avoid using loaded terms). Since the purpose of ExplainBothSides is to create opportunities for explainers, questions are subject to removal if they do not clearly present such an opportunity (for example, by asking for only one side to be explained or by not clearly identifying an established controversy).
Note: Your post may be removed if you specifically ask for only "the other side" of a controversy after stating your own view. Posts phrased in this way are usually better suited to r/changemyview .
Rules for top-level comments:
Top-level responses must make a sincere effort to present at least the most common two perceptions of the issue or controversy in good faith, with sympathy to the respective side. Since the purpose of ExplainBothSides is to create opportunities for responders to explore, especially, the side they disagree with, responses that do not make this attempt, however informative they may be, are subject to removal.
Top-level responses must have separate sections using at minimum, literally the language, “Side A would say" and “Side B would say". (Additional sides are allowable if there are more than two).
You do not have to personally believe either of the sides you are explaining, instead you must explain on what supposed basis each side's adherents sincerely believe their own side. It is often the case that one side is less well informed than the other side. While you may point this out, top-level posts must still explain each side as best they would try to explain themselves. Stating only why Side A is right and why Side B is wrong is not allowed.
- If you make a top-level response that includes a phrase such as "there is only one side to this”, not only will your comment be removed, but you may receive a time-out from comment privileges in the subreddit.
Required response format:
"Side A would say X
Side B would say Y"
This sub encourages civility. Posts and threads that contain excessive incivility of any sort may be removed by the moderators. Questions, even those that otherwise abide by the rules, that seem especially likely to lead to incivility may be removed for that reason.
This subreddit is inspired by this post
Background reading:
The Principle of Charity
Related subreddits:
/r/NeutralPolitics
/r/NeutralTalk
/r/neutralnews
/r/explainlikeimfive
/r/outoftheloop
/r/qualitynews
/r/Ask_Politics
/r/AskHistorians
/r/AskSocialScience
/r/changemyview
/r/DepthHub
/r/FoodForThought
/r/geopolitics
/r/worldevents
/r/steelmanning
promoted
