Unicorn

1. Learn about logical fallacies
   
   
2. Learn about cognitive distortions (it's a mental health thing but I find it relevant to logical fallacies and in discourse with people)
   
   

Once you learn about these things, start identifying them in people's discussions, especially easy if you're just observing people debating and not actually in a debate itself so then there's less likelihood of having blindspots.

Note that just because someone uses fallacies or emotional thinking doesn't necessarily mean they're "wrong." (Also see: "fallacy fallacy" — sometimes people think just being able to call out fallacies makes them "right"/"win" the debate.) Also sometimes "right" or "wrong" is opinion-based or delves into ethics and morality type of stuff which goes into philosophy stuff.

Good to keep in mind:

• Why is someone saying something?
  
  
• What do they gain from saying that?
  
  
• Are they "sponsored" by an agency or government?
  
  
• Do I have an emotional reaction to what they're saying? If so, what emotion? Why that emotion?
  
  
• Am I willing to accept what they're saying or reject it? Why am I willing to accept/reject?
  
  
• Is there a side they are trying to vilify? Are they trying to discourage you from listening to the other side? Why? What does that side say?
  
  

Just keeping an open mind and being curious and willing to look deeper/ask questions is helpful.

I also like to recommend this article a lot: Types of Propaganda, Propaganda Techniques, and Propaganda Strategies