From an outsider’s point of view, it just seemed you were each equally making firm points from your own perspectives, using similar words but with different underlying assumptions.
In short, in head-to-head mode, you couldn’t see eye-to-eye.
Stepping *away* from an A vs B perspective and giving a C perspective allows a fresh look at perspectives A and B.
You weren’t going to see his POV.
He wasn’t going to see your POV.
So I gave a third way.
But I understand what you’re saying. But neither one of you struck me as unintelligent in the least. Just an empirical objectivist vs a representationalist position.
My apologies if I mischaracterized and wish you the best in your debate.