Blacks and Hispanics are rather useless when it comes to invention

Author: Kaitlyn
black
white
Asian
Hispanic
Invention

Posts

Total: 36
#31
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,515
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Kaitlyn
Observations can spark you to test something, but they should never be the conclusion.
I don't think Charles Darwin would agree with you, but it's right that most of the time thoughtful observations lead to further research with controlled variables.

So, me asking for studies/data for the points you make is an "argument trap". We should just believe whatever you think you observe.
For the millionth time, you don't need evidence to make your point. If you can't stand it, it's because you're clueless about how to refute a logical argument based on simple observations. It's very simplistic to say "you have no evidence so your argument is invalid". Many famous people in the past were mocked to show their insighful observations that saved the world later, like Pasteur for example.
Topic's author
#32
Kaitlyn
Kaitlyn's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 857
3
3
5
Kaitlyn's avatar
Kaitlyn
3
3
5
-->
@IlDiavolo
Observations can spark you to test something, but they should never be the conclusion.
I don't think Charles Darwin would agree with you, but it's right that most of the time thoughtful observations lead to further research with controlled variables.
Yes. Good.

So, me asking for studies/data for the points you make is an "argument trap". We should just believe whatever you think you observe.
For the millionth time, you don't need evidence to make your point. If you can't stand it, it's because you're clueless about how to refute a logical argument based on simple observations. It's very simplistic to say "you have no evidence so your argument is invalid". Many famous people in the past were mocked to show their insighful observations that saved the world later, like Pasteur for example.
Jesus man.

You do need evidence to make your points, otherwise there is no difference between you and someone saying the complete opposite.

Insightful observations are nearly useless until they are verified. The best they can do is give us an idea of what to test/study. Any conclusion you draw from observations is inductive in nature and isn't reliable.

I honestly don't know what is wrong with you. You keep saying that you don't need evidence to make your points, then you provide evidence to make your point, then you go back to saying you don't need evidence to make your point.
#33
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,515
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Kaitlyn
Insightful observations are nearly useless until they are verified. The best they can do is give us an idea of what to test/study. Any conclusion you draw from observations is inductive in nature and isn't reliable.
Saying that black people dominate certain sports doesnt need any kind of evidence, it's just a matter of observation. You can't deny this simple fact just because there is not a formal study, that's foolish because the correllation is evident, you just have to watch Espn.

Besides, I didnt even know there were studies about that, the study I provided was not to prove my point but to explain why it happens that, because I was pretty sure blacks have something special that makes them better than any other ethnicity in certain sports.

And there is another observation I want to make, if you let me do it. Blacks also dominate bodybuilding. It's easy for them to grow big muscles. Do I need a study for that? No, but I'm really interested to know why. 😆
Topic's author
#34
Kaitlyn
Kaitlyn's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 857
3
3
5
Kaitlyn's avatar
Kaitlyn
3
3
5
-->
@IlDiavolo
Insightful observations are nearly useless until they are verified. The best they can do is give us an idea of what to test/study. Any conclusion you draw from observations is inductive in nature and isn't reliable.
Saying that black people dominate certain sports doesnt need any kind of evidence, it's just a matter of observation. 
I don't think there's any point in continuing a conversation with someone who doesn't think he needs to provide evidence to support his claims.
#35
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@IlDiavolo
You might be thinking that scientists only draw conclusions from lab experiments. That's wrong. We can infer certain things based only on simple observations, like when Newton witnessed an apple falling to the ground, he elaborated his gravitational theory from that simple fact.
This is correct, and something many would-be-debaters and science acolytes (whom are not scientists in any way) do not understand.

You only need experimental/statistical data if you use that as a premise in an argument. If your premises are axiomatic or universally observable there is no need. Asking for data when no data was used in the argument is a sign of shallow understanding of rational epistemology and thus science.

To give an example of a field with zero experimental data but many sound arguments: Mathematics
Topic's author
#36
Kaitlyn
Kaitlyn's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 857
3
3
5
Kaitlyn's avatar
Kaitlyn
3
3
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
You only need experimental/statistical data if you use that as a premise in an argument. If your premises are axiomatic
Yes, and I've already discussed this with him. Yes, there are some types of arguments that don't need to be sourced/have data/whatever.

universally observable there is no need
This is where you and IlDiavolo start to go wrong. Many of things he has argued aren't universally observable because they require some level of induction. How is it "universally observable" that Blacks have the most stamina? Can a child look at a Black person and say, "he/she has the most stamina out of any race?"

Universally observable things do exist. Things like fire are universally observable. But IlDiavolo isn't talking about those things. He's presenting inductive arguments as if they are axiomatic.