The problem with the Big "A" Atheists is that they have absolutized their belief system to the point that it overrides everything else, including logic, reason and evidence.
This is a debate site, yet you prefer to debate on the forums? Interesting, though I'm afraid I don't share the same preference. I will clarify myself, but I will not debate you here.This is a debate site.... the forums included. Some people would rather debate on forums and some would rather formally debate. I would say the formal debaters are doing it so other give them brownie points and they could feel good about themselves. The forum debaters have free rain and aren't trying to impress anyone other than get their points across. I would say debating on the forums is much better and will actually finish an issue. Only people that can't handle actually debating their idea will stay away from the forums... or, just a narcissistic itch that they want to win something. The forums are far superior to the formal debate function in getting your topic to its conclusion.
(^8Exactly. Finally, someone gets it.
That doesn't happen on this site. You are talking like the judges on this site are professionals, they're not. I for one am no professional when i decide to vote and i don't even think about half the stuff you said. I just vote for the person that i felt had the better arguments and/or if i found there is one argument that needed to be addressed in order for the whole thing to be true... and, i won't consider any of the other arguments if this argument isn't met. And i am decently intelligent, so my vote is sorta good ... but not anywhere near professional. There are people worse than me, way worse. Plus, everyone voting is in the forums. Like i already mentioned to Brutal... a formal debate that's not this site in real life... can be good. But i still even have beef with that. Debating has a pro and con, but reality is, in real life... both people are pro and con.
Debating's like a sport, a hobby... It is not nearly the best way to get to the conclusions of an issue. Regular discourse with debate elements is the best... and that's what you find in the forums. Seriously how do you guys not get that? Your arguments that it's better are really making you guys seem like you're trying to make yourselves out to be more intellectual bc you formally debate. If you guys would say debating has it's own positives... like research and sources, i would agree there are elements to it that are good... but, you guys are making it out that if you don't debate formally ... you're stupid or lower than me. Give me a fucking break... it reeks of self importance.
They are held accountable in a different way. The entire community will come down on them if they aren't being logical. In any case, you are pointing out pro's to formal debates. I never said there aren't any. I never said you don't have to know a bunch and research it. It's still debating none the less. But it is no better than the forums when you are having a conversation with someone that also knows his/her stuff, and isn't trolling. In that case, i believe it is even better than the formal debates for the main reason... you can get to a conclusion. This doesn't mean you can't with formal debates. But, more often than not, given talking to the right person, that is more achievable on the forums since you aren't bound to just 5 rounds. Following certain debate structures... sometimes you only have 2 rounds to debate your idea. That is not enough to get to the conclusion of certain topics. On top of that, the substantive people on the forums aren't just some random dummies... they are well studied on the topics they are talking about. Plus, for me personally, i'm a paralegal... i don't need extra help in learning how to debate since i do it for work every freaking day. It's refreshing coming to the forums and shooting from the hip. That doesn't mean i am just spewing nonsense and speaking from ignorance. I have researched and debated the topics i am most passionate about many times over the years. I don't need to use a formal debate to get better. All i need is to debate people on the forums and continue to grow.I do the same in a thread, but people cannot be held to account as easlity as in a debate for what they believe.
"But i still even have beef with that. Debating has a pro and con, but reality is, in real life... both people are pro and con."I just read that back and now i'm sounding like i'm trying to say formal debates aren't good. That's not what i meant and i acknowledge there are good things in formal debates. My main beef with formal debates is that i find it to be a disservice to the audience in certain cases. By debating someone that says something like "Hitler didn't kill Jews," by debating this person you are basically saying it's a debatable subject. Your giving dumb statements or topics a level of respect that they don't deserve. That's always been my main beef with formal debates. Not that they're bad, just in certain cases why debate the opposite side and give it even an ounce of respect. This has to do with debating in general. Everything else about this site i said stands.
There can be many reasons why they didn't. I don't know the first thing of the proper structures for debates or the rules. Why would i do something where i'd just lose bc i didn't know the rules? One of my debates i lost bc i didn't have good spelling. Like i had the time to go back and edit all of my work... i don't have that kind of time. Today and yesterday are rare days i can be on this site for a few hours. Than comes down to popularity of the person (which makes a difference in some cases) and semantics. People win off semantics... you know? That isn't winning in my book. There are a lot of things that go into those formal debates that give you a win that has nothing to do with the arguments. But again... i'm not saying they are bad... you aren't getting it or keep dismissing it. It's not better than the forums. And yeah... some topics don't have a conclusion... but you can get a lot further along than you can with the formal. My contention is that Brutal made it seem like the formal debate function is the only way to debate your ideas and/or so much better that he didn't want to waste his time answering Etrnl's arguments... it's not, and that comes off as very self important, bottom line.I have had thousand post threads on DDO and never seen a resolution. The problem is that what drives a worldview gets in the way. The parties involved become dead to anything other than their viewpoint and they cannot be reasoned with. That is when challenging them to a formal became the only avenue to put up or shut up. They refused to do both. So I just walked away from the discussion and refused to engage the person again.
Guys, I found the troll!
I do the same in a thread, but people cannot be held to account as easlity as in a debate for what they believe.They are held accountable in a different way. The entire community will come down on them if they aren't being logical. In any case, you are pointing out pro's to formal debates.
I never said there aren't any. I never said you don't have to know a bunch and research it. It's still debating none the less. But it is no better than the forums when you are having a conversation with someone that also knows his/her stuff, and isn't trolling. In that case, i believe it is even better than the formal debates for the main reason... you can get to a conclusion.
This doesn't mean you can't with formal debates. But, more often than not, given talking to the right person, that is more achievable on the forums since you aren't bound to just 5 rounds. Following certain debate structures... sometimes you only have 2 rounds to debate your idea. That is not enough to get to the conclusion of certain topics. On top of that, the substantive people on the forums aren't just some random dummies... they are well studied on the topics they are talking about. Plus, for me personally, i'm a paralegal... i don't need extra help in learning how to debate since i do it for work every freaking day. It's refreshing coming to the forums and shooting from the hip. That doesn't mean i am just spewing nonsense and speaking from ignorance. I have researched and debated the topics i am most passionate about many times over the years. I don't need to use a formal debate to get better. All i need is to debate people on the forums and continue to grow.
Bottom line... both have their positives and both have their negatives (i would say debating with structure, by design, has more negatives than the latter imho anyways). But in any case, to make it sound like formal debates are the only intellectual way to address your issues and/or the best way to do it is simply false.
If you can't put a label on the truth you are a skeptic, bouncing around on the waves of disbelief and uncertainty and any wind of doctrine, never able to believe because of your ignorance and unbelief.
I have had thousand post threads on DDO and never seen a resolution. The problem is that what drives a worldview gets in the way. The parties involved become dead to anything other than their viewpoint and they cannot be reasoned with. That is when challenging them to a formal became the only avenue to put up or shut up. They refused to do both. So I just walked away from the discussion and refused to engage the person again.There can be many reasons why they didn't. I don't know the first thing of the proper structures for debates or the rules. Why would i do something where i'd just lose bc i didn't know the rules? One of my debates i lost bc i didn't have good spelling. Like i had the time to go back and edit all of my work... i don't have that kind of time.
Today and yesterday are rare days i can be on this site for a few hours. Than comes down to popularity of the person (which makes a difference in some cases) and semantics.
People win off semantics... you know? That isn't winning in my book. There are a lot of things that go into those formal debates that give you a win that has nothing to do with the arguments. But again... i'm not saying they are bad... you aren't getting it or keep dismissing it. It's not better than the forums. And yeah... some topics don't have a conclusion... but you can get a lot further along than you can with the formal. My contention is that Brutal made it seem like the formal debate function is the only way to debate your ideas and/or so much better that he didn't want to waste his time answering Etrnl's arguments... it's not, and that comes off as very self important, bottom line.
If you can't put a label on the truth you are a skeptic, bouncing around on the waves of disbelief and uncertainty and any wind of doctrine, never able to believe because of your ignorance and unbelief.You suggest a false dichotomy of inflexible certainty and rootless disbelief. i am a skeptic;
I believe certainty is impossible (other than in trivial cases such as tautologes and definitions),but I don't "bounce around on any wind of doctrine"!
If I am an exception to what you asserted then perhaps its not a very good assertion about anybody - so why make it?
I only debate what I am passionate about.I note that PGA has not yet had a single formal debate on DA. He has, however, made over 500 forum posts.
I believe certainty is impossible (other than in trivial cases such as tautologes and definitions),but I don't "bounce around on any wind of doctrine"!Are you certain of that belief? What you did was create a self-refuting or self-contradictory statement.
But feed him at your own risk, he's as stupid as they come, and has been that way for years. He's sort of a stalker too so don't let him smell you.
Who did I call stupid?
Who did I call stupid?Guys, I found the troll!Lol. We've known about him for ages. He's sort of like a pet. But feed him at your own risk, he's as stupid as they come, and has been that way for years. He's sort of a stalker too so don't let him smell you.
See? This is where reading comprehension comes in. I did not call anyone stupid.
Now to you. You get angry, call people clowns, type in all caps, and needlessly repeat posts. It undercuts your argument. You look like a mentally unstable person.
You're too emotional. All we have to do is make you angry and you go ahead and kill your own argument for us. If you trust your arguments are right, then there is no need for insults or all bold/caps shouting. Calm down.
