The Veritistic Dynamics of Simple Random Debates

Abstract

The debate dynamics studied in this chapter stem from the most basic implementation of the general simulation design: Arguments are introduced randomly and proponents opt for the closest coherent position. The simple simulations shall serve as a foil with which we may contrast later, more sophisticated debate dynamics. Moreover, we investigate, in this chapter, the verisimilitude evolutions in the simulated random debates, while taking into account (a) different initial conditions (low vs. high initial truthlikeness of proponent positions) and (b) the specific evolution of the space of coherent positions (compact vs. fragmented debates). Yet, in addition to studying the truth-conduciveness of random argumentation under various conditions, we will scrutinize whether there are indicators that signal reliably the verisimilitude of a given position at an early stage of the debate. More specifically, we analyze in which circumstances do (a) full consensus reached by some proponents and (b)stability of a proponent’s position accurately indicate the proximity to the true position.