Who is the BesT debater in this cite.

Author: Username1

Posts

Total: 122
#91
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Ehyeh
Oromagi. I've said i will argue reincarnation is very likely correct. I've said i will have that burden of proof. Do you want to do it? i have the entire burden of proof.

  • Sure.  If you submit debate terms I like, I'll do it.  If you'd rather I compose the debate, I'll do that too.
Well then you've been doing it wrong, as all your debates assume a million axioms before the discussion can even begin. What form of "truth seeking" is that?
  • scientific
We can see if this argument stands or not in our actual debate? if you don't want to do it, that's fine. Just say so.
  • You know newborns that speak in complete sentences?  Wow.  I would like to hear about that.
Wittgenstein would say that simply means they have axioms which were never questioned, so even if you win the debate and they realise they lost. They don't change their mind as a consequence of having an underlying belief which necessitates their current one. All you actually point out is the fact you never find complete truth in any of your debates, as peoples axioms come out unfazed.
  • That's why Wittgenstein and I always define the rules of our particular language game before start rolling the dice.

#92
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
You compose the debate, please. 
#93
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
  • You know newborns that speak in complete sentences?  Wow.  I would like to hear about that.
I would love to comment on it too!

#94
TWS1405
TWS1405's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,048
3
4
7
TWS1405's avatar
TWS1405
3
4
7
-->
@Username1
Who is the BesT debater in this cite.
Wow. Just wow. *facepalm*
#95
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@oromagi
That's mostly a Klan term without much meaning beyond insult.  Was that your intent?
I didn't know it was an insult. That is what a lot of reformed people and even some hardcore catholic apologists have called that persuasion of Catholicism. Is there a different term I should be using? Is it Latin Rite?

C.S. Lewis is a very interesting pick. What is your favorite theology book by him? I had to read Mere Christianity in both college and high school. I know he's written a lot more than that, but I must admit that is the majority of my exposure to C.S. Lewis beyond Narnia.

No preference to any church father. Interesting. Is this because of a theological belief or you just don't happen to like any one particular Church Father over the others?

I'll also give you my answers so you understand where I was coming from when I called you a Romanist:

I'm closest to Reformed Baptist (London Baptist Confession of 1689 if that helps). I grew up non-denominational but happened to end up in a couple Reformed Churches in college which is where I picked up all the terms. That and minoring in theology. The old joke goes, if you want free theology classes, just anger a Reformed believer lol. Yeah I learned a LOT in a few short years just from asking questions and angering some of them by accident lol. They tend to use the phrase "romanist" when talking about Catholics who have a strict adherence to Papal infallibility and veneration of the Pope to the maximum possible.

I like John Gill. Mainly because he is extremely thorough in his research. But, obviously, nobody is perfect except Jesus.

I like Clement of Rome and a lot of Justin Martyr. But I can't say ALL of Justin Martyr because I haven't finished reading him yet lol. Justin Martyr is great to me because he makes strong use of epistemic logic, which I like a lot.

#96
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Public-Choice
Mere Christianity for me too.

Roman Catholic is the religion with the Pope.

Romanist is derogatory- last popularly used by the KKK campaigning against Al Smith in 1928

I'm a big Roman history fan but I've never been much of a reader of ancient church philosophy.  Most of it is just so much intellectual gymnastics trying to formulate a cohesive, plausible system of belief.  I have read a little St. Augustine.  I tend to be more of a Jesuit in philosophy- pro-liberal, pro-democracy, proletariat.  In my estimation, the current Pope is the closest to my notion of Christian ideal than any previous Pope.  I hope the next goes further yet.  I am skeptical that there was an actual single figure named Jesus whose words and deeds are effectively captured in the New Testament, but I consider the Sermon on the Mount the core of Western morality and if Jesus was real, I assume he'd prefer a religion entirely founded on love thy neighbor, peaceful self-improvement, non-materialism.  Thoreau and Gandhi are my idea of good Christians.

Irish Catholicism is cultural- big on family before everything else, guilt based, progressive, education forward, romantic, skeptical, poetic.
#97
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@oromagi
Hmm. Interesting.

I am guessing you mean materialism in the economic sense, correct? There's, like, 4 different types of materialism. 

You say you're a liberal, but the current Pope is a socialist. Do you consider socialism the end goal of liberalism?

So I guess you aren't a Roman Catholic, then. The vast majority I meet are Roman Catholic.

Personally I believe that Jesus did exist, that the gospels are real eyewitness accounts that were preserved perfectly (though not in the form of majority manuscripts), and that what Jesus taught was that we, as humans, are hopeless entrapped in sin and we will never be able to reform ourselves. This is why He died for our sins and He changes us and makes us new.

With our nature being changed into that of the good human, we are better people, and can create a better world. Btw, I think part of being a good human is to examine all things and hold fast to that which is true, not to shut off our eyes and ears to everything that doesn't agree with us. After all, if it is false, then we have nothing to worry about. And better yet, we can now better explain to someone else why something is false, knowing what it teaches.
#98
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Public-Choice
You say you're a liberal, but the current Pope is a socialist.

I write a lot about this subject on the site.  I stick to traditional economic definitions of capitalism and socialism and I don't believe any modern economy can succeed without both tools used in dynamic tension.  I think most popular thinking about socialism, capitalism, communism, etc is trashed by Cold War emotionalism.  Stalin, for example, was no Socialist and anybody who thinks so fails Socialism 101.

I don't believe Pope Francis has ever identified as a Socialist or expressed an economic plan of any kind, although he has made some worthy critiques of Capitalism.  I do think that the Jesus I read would have approved of the theory that the means of production should be managed by the people via democracy  or that wealth is best used to improve the fortunes of all.  Fishes and loaves, least of these brothers,  whoever has two tunics, etc.

Do you consider socialism the end goal of liberalism?
The end goal of Liberalism is Liberty, Equality, and Justice for all.
#99
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@Ehyeh
Just use the waybackmachine, he did win it. Although bluesteel strikes me as someone who was likely male who enjoyed pretending to be a woman on the internet to fulfill some sort of fetish of his. 
Not really. Bluesteel was male, everyone knew he was male, he wasn’t even pretending -- he just changed his profile’s gender as a joke once and didn’t end up changing it back. 
#100
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@Public-Choice
Really? Do you happen to have the archive link for it? I remember Mikal winning it.

Admittedly, Mikal conceded the debate in the comments after the round, which was weird and some judges voted as a result of that. As I recall, Bluesteel was ahead before the concession happened, though, and all the best judges who voted -- including Raisor and Thett on the actual round, and Whiteflame in a “Terrible RFD of the Week” forum post later -- voted for Bluesteel. 

I also think I’m a pretty good judge (of course, everyone thinks this of themselves, so perhaps it means little) -- I was DART’s first Voting Moderator, and of course you’re free to take a look at my votes on this website -- and I thought it was a reasonably clear win for Bluesteel. 
#101
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@Public-Choice
I’ve got respect for Mikal, of course -- his win against RoyLatham was particularly epic. But I do think he lost to stronger opponents fairly often. For instance, 16kadams beat Mikal on the same topic (abolishing capital punishment) a few years later. As I recall, FourTrouble also beat him on decriminalizing sex work (though I might be misremembering, and Mikal may have just conceded due to time constraints). I suspect that by around 2018, even I was as good as Mikal was (I attribute this to my accumulating formal debate experience). 

I think Bluesteel, as Thett mentioned, was likely the strongest debater on DDO by far. I think Whiteflame, Raisor, Thett, Danielle, Bsh1, F-16, YYW, J.Kenyon, Yraelz, and FourTrouble (at least when he put in the effort/seemed excited about the debate) were all pretty high up there. I’m probably missing people from DDO’s earlier times. But it is telling that apart from Danielle and FourTrouble, who were naturally really good, and F-16, who spent a bunch of time researching and self-learning elements of formal debate, the rest all have some kind of serious formal debate experience. 
#102
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@oromagi

--> @Shila
How can a child have the knowledge of several adults unless it gained the knowledge from past lives?
  • High intelligence 
Jesus never became any smarter after his resurrection.
  • How do you know that?
Jesus said he had all authority over heaven and earth.

Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

But he let the Romans who crucified him remain in power. The Romans went on to destroy the Holy Temple, Jerusalem and replaced Judaism the religion that Jesus followed with the Roman Catholic Church.
That’s proof Jesus never became any smarter after his resurrection.

How dumb was Jesus before the resurrection?

Jesus wanted his disciples to eat him.

John 6:53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 

#103
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@Tejretics
Admittedly, Mikal conceded the debate in the comments after the round,
I didn't know that. Gosh it was so many years ago but I remembered the forum saying he destroyed Bluesteel. 

Anywho, thanks for the link! And you're right, she did win by a long shot.

I also forgot about the trick they used back then of using url shorteners to have more characters lol.

I remember looking at that going "woah! That's so brilliant!!" Lol.

Man good times. Good times.
#104
Novice_II
Novice_II's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 174
2
6
6
Novice_II's avatar
Novice_II
2
6
6
-->
@oromagi
Okay, then you would have no issue debating this propositionally. 
There is a required rating of 1900, consequently, you are the only person who can accept this debate. If you genuinely believe that RationalMadman is the best debater this should not be a problem for you. 

#105
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Novice_II
-->@oromagi
Okay, then you would have no issue debating this propositionally. 
There is a required rating of 1900, consequently, you are the only person who can accept this debate. If you genuinely believe that RationalMadman is the best debater this should not be a problem for you. 
  • So I argue that RM is best by quantity not quality and you create a debate that defines BEST as quality not quantity and then gutlessly pretend you are offering some kind of man to man proposition.
    • That is, when you say you wish to debate me propositionally you mean you are a lying varmint laying traps
      • obvious trap debates are not moderated
      • no thanks to bad faith trolls
    • BEST is a child's argument because the condition is subjective.  Real debaters use objective terminology in their thesis.
      • I can see here why they call you "novice"
      • RatMan is the BEST debater on debateart.com because he holds all the medals and thinks all-consumingly that the leaderboard is some kind of reflection of quality.  RatMan is also the laziest  debater on debateart.com and holds the site record for most chickenshit forfeits.  In spite of being a shit debater, he will almost certainly be number one again some day because he has ratings figured out: quantity combined with a certain minimum effort will eventually overtake excellence using the current ratings system.
        • Of course, I don't have to explain this concept to you since 40% of all your debates are against mall.
        • Since imitation is the highest form of flattery, we can see your admiration for RatMan belies you claim.
        • Since you repeatedly claim without evidence that you are a great debater but RatMan can more or less beat you in any debate at will (how many have you lost to him?  8? 10?) you must at least concede that RatMan is a much  greater debater than you and if you are not lying (you probably are),  and are truly a great debater (probably aren't), then you have already infered that RatMan must be one of the best.
  • Call out debates are a violation of DebateArt.com CODE of CONDUCT
    • moderators can delete debates... for extenuating circumstances (usually involving blatant Code of Conduct violations).
    • Harassment
      • Targeted harassment of any member prohibited, as is inciting others to do so at your behest. This includes wishing or hoping that someone and/or their loved ones experiences physical harm.
      • Creating [debates, threads] to call-out specific users qualifies as targeted harassment, as does obsessive attempts to derail unrelated topics with impertinent grudges.
    • check yourself before you wreck yourself


#106
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
In no particular order Tejerertics, whiteflame, RationalMadman, SemperFortis 

Debate is about being able to argue any point, and I think these people are able to do that really well.

I wouldn’t classify Oromagi, myself or Barney as noobsnipers - as much as people who are really, really good at arguing points they think are right. That is a skill in and of itself, but less in keeping with traditional “good at debate”
#107
Novice_II
Novice_II's avatar
Debates: 98
Posts: 174
2
6
6
Novice_II's avatar
Novice_II
2
6
6
-->
@oromagi
Most of this diatribe/rant holds no particular relevance to me, seemingly even going as far as to state there is a secret underground rule that I have violated (perhaps created yesterday, or maybe on a different code of conduct entirely that only you can access). The majority of people in this chat who exhibit basic rationality, as well as the ability to read the English language can observe against this. 

What I observe from you however, is "no, I am not willing to defend my assertion in a debate," which is not...much of a surprise to me from you. That is primarily the extent to which my interest purveys. I am not here to argue in the comments with you over the span of days like a child, I am only interested in my challenge that you are too scared to accept for now. 

Since you repeatedly claim without evidence that you are a great debater 
This is stated without any form of evidence whatsoever, but I guess you may not have considered that. I don't really care if I am a good debater or not, and while I am sure others hold their opinions on that, I would not waste time asserting I am. Even if I am the worst debater in the world (of wish would implicate me with no concern) I still challenged you to defend your own position (that you have doubled down on multiple times) in a formal debate where a collection of voters can decide who has stronger arguments, and you are still reluctant to do so. I wonder why. 
#108
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Tejretics
Really? Do you happen to have the archive link for it? I remember Mikal winning it.
truly epic
#109
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Ramshutu
In no particular order Tejerertics, whiteflame, RationalMadman, SemperFortis 

Debate is about being able to argue any point, and I think these people are able to do that really well.

I wouldn’t classify Oromagi, myself or Barney as noobsnipers - as much as people who are really, really good at arguing points they think are right. That is a skill in and of itself, but less in keeping with traditional “good at debate”
You highlighted their talent for arguing, they are really good at arguing points they think are right.
But are they capable of agreeing when they think they are wrong?

#110
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
Also, since I forgot to bring this up -- I think 16kadams, when he was not source-spamming for the sake of it (and was genuinely trying to win rounds), was incredibly hard to defeat. He shared Bluesteel’s ability to quickly read and tear apart empirical evidence in a clear way. Especially his last few debates on DDO -- taking positions I personally disagree with, on a border fence, a minimum wage, and gun control -- were really carefully-argued. He won against Danielle arguing a really tough side (though I’m guessing he would’ve struggled against Bsh1’s case against Zarroette on the same topic), and also had wins against Mikal (on a balanced topic) and RoyLatham (admittedly Roy had the much harder side on this topic).

Thett, 16k, and Roy were probably the best conservative debaters on DDO (and I’d say that was the order of their strength; I think 16k’s loss to Roy on open borders was mostly just Pro prioritizing source-spamming over actually making the rigorous argument -- in another world, I think 16k and ResponsiblyIrresponsible could have won that debate). 
#111
Bones
Bones's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 968
3
7
9
Bones's avatar
Bones
3
7
9
Semperfortis is the best debater on this site, and if you contend, you must posit either an a posteriori and a priori symmetry breaker lending credence to the contrapositive ontology, which is currently impossible. 
#112
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Bones
Semperfortis is the best debater on this site, and if you contend, you must posit either an a posteriori and a priori symmetry breaker lending credence to the contrapositive ontology, which is currently impossible. 

It's funny.  I don't think I've ever exchanged words with him before and I haven't seen  any activity from him  here for at least a year but when I listed him as one of the best debaters on this site, he sent me a friend request within 10 minutes. My guess is he'll see your post.
#113
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
I think semperfortis is definitely a great philosopher. I've actually read all of his debates in the last few days. There are flaws in a few of them, but it's understandable why most people can't see them. You have to analytically dissect each of his axioms.
 








#114
Lair77
Lair77's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 97
0
1
4
Lair77's avatar
Lair77
0
1
4
i just accepted the "biden has dementia" debate challenged.

the description was really long and the character limit is 10k words.  my opponent, despite having no debate history, seems pretty dedicated, im kinda scared.  my win-loss rate might go down the shitter. 

or even worse, i might have to spend 20 hours writing a novel explaining definitions of things.  lol
#115
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Lair77
i just accepted the "biden has dementia" debate challenged.

the description was really long and the character limit is 10k words.  my opponent, despite having no debate history, seems pretty dedicated, im kinda scared.  my win-loss rate might go down the shitter.  

or even worse, i might have to spend 20 hours writing a novel explaining definitions of things.  lol
It is going to be hard to argue Biden has dementia.
Biden has been in public view most of his life serving 36 years as a senator and 8 years as Vice President to Obama.
His stuttering and gaffes are also well known.

31 days later

#116
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
I think its me
#117
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
especially since i beat barney
#118
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
I have participated in 27 debates (excluding rap battles)
I have debated 9 (if my counts are right) people with win ratios of greater than 50%, of those I lost or tied all but 2 (out of 11 total debates, since some people I debated multiple times). If we were only considering "good" debaters, that would put my win rate at 18%, which hurts to say.
And yet I'm in 53 out of 641 people who have completed at least 1 debate on the site. This puts me comfortably in the top 10%, though I consider it pretty bad. I suspect that I'm at best average out of active debaters.


#119
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@K_Michael
This puts me comfortably in the top 10%, though I consider it pretty bad.
LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 

I can't tell if you are serious. 


#120
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@Vici
53/641 = top 8.26%. And yes, I am disappointed that I do not rank higher.