Heaven - A Fool's Paradise - DPChallenge Forums

06/23/2010 08:30:12 PM · #376

Originally posted by Louis:

Nobody takes your bait and you react like a petulant child. Ridiculous.

Ever see Arrested Development Louis? LOL

Bait. My foot...

Message edited by author 2010-06-23 20:30:30.

06/23/2010 08:49:42 PM · #377

Without putting words in your mouth Louis, can you explain to me how offering to debate someone on a topic in a structured setting rises at all to the level of "baiting"? I'm serious. I want to know.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

06/23/2010 09:54:01 PM · #378

I know people read these threads who do not participate. I wanted to defend myself to y'all a bit. I did not bring this format up as any sort of "bait" or even as a way to get out of some corner I found myself in. It's an idea I've had for a while. To prove this, I will quote an IM I sent Louis on 4/30/10 (we IM from time to time).

4/30/2010 2:18:27 PM DrAchoo: Louis you know what would be fun? to have some formal debate on Rant. Topic. Argument for. Argument against. Rebuttal for each. Concluding statement and then open it up to the masses.

I didn't receive a reply at the time. I have had a little fun in the last few posts calling people chicken, but can I be blamed for deriving a little satisfaction from the fact nobody wants to take me up on this after I have endured people declaring that "Plenty of people have called your reasoning flaccid and your positions weak, for good reason, and in all fairness"? I would have thought people would be salivating at the opportunity to teach me a lesson.

zxaar

06/23/2010 09:56:34 PM · #379

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I didn't receive a reply at the time. I have had a little fun in the last few posts calling people chicken, but can I be blamed for deriving a little satisfaction from the fact nobody wants to take me up on this after I have endured people declaring that "Plenty of people have called your reasoning flaccid and your positions weak, for good reason, and in all fairness"? I would have thought people would be salivating at the opportunity to teach me a lesson.

may be people have better things to do. Jus sayin.

:-D

Louis

Nikon D800

06/23/2010 10:19:15 PM · #380

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Without putting words in your mouth Louis, can you explain to me how offering to debate someone on a topic in a structured setting rises at all to the level of "baiting"? I'm serious. I want to know.

I suppose it was your delivery. I object to conclusions being drawn on why nobody has responded to the "offer" (I for one think it would be a waste of time to hold formal debate in a venue like this). I especially think it an unreasonable response to call individuals out, or goad anyone into participating, as you did ("wanna go" etc.). Sounds very much like baiting.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

06/23/2010 10:31:05 PM · #381

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Well, since it's been almost a whole day since I suggested this and there are no takers, I'll assume the motion voted down. But not before a big old hearty "bwak bok bok bok" from me. :P

My impression of the Rant Pack has dropped considerably. Nobody could even rise to a mano-a-mano challenge in the meathead division of formal debate. So be it.

Well since it's been a whole day of updating my website, washing the car, mowing the lawn, pulling weeds, picking black raspberries, doing the laundry, wrapping up a zoo fundraiser, landing a photo shoot and two freelance jobs, and shuttling the kids to and from a pool party on the last day of school, let's just pop in again and see if Jason is still making grand assumptions with no basis in reality.... ah, yup.

Since when do you need approval to start a discussion? Just start the thread and I'm sure you'll get takers. However, I've yet to see you approach a religious argument without relying heavily on fallacy, so I'm more than a little skeptical to see you call for an "honest" debate now. Either you don't realize that you're setting a huge handicap for yourself or you intend to rig the format to make any claim equally valid. I'll bet more than a few people are waiting to see what constitutes honest debate in your mind.

And FYI- I'll be out of state tomorrow, so you needn't assume I'm cowering in fear.

david_c

Canon EOS-7D

06/23/2010 10:36:10 PM · #382

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

But not before a big old hearty "bwak bok bok bok" from me. :P

If you're itchin' for a formal debate against an atheist/non-believer, and feel your positions and convictions are strong enough, may I suggest you try IIDB.org? I'm sure you'll find a full spectrum of minds with which to pit wits.

Or, if you prefer, why don't you frame the question and post your opening affirmative stance? Perhaps someone will take you up on your generous offer.

edit: beaten to it.

Message edited by author 2010-06-23 22:37:13.

06/23/2010 10:49:02 PM · #383

Originally posted by david_c:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
But not before a big old hearty "bwak bok bok bok" from me. :P

If you're itchin' for a formal debate against an atheist/non-believer, and feel your positions and convictions are strong enough, may I suggest you try IIDB.org? I'm sure you'll find a full spectrum of minds with which to pit wits.

Or, if you prefer, why don't you frame the question and post your opening affirmative stance? Perhaps someone will take you up on your generous offer.

edit: beaten to it.

I haven't been to that site. I participated for years on alt.atheism.org. Frankly, I think it would be more fun to exchange ideas with people I know.

The problem with just starting is then I get four responses and once again it's multiple parallel discussions (something I'm trying to avoid). Plus I want to mutually pick a topic that both parties want to discuss.

I'm not trying to rig the results like Shannon unfairly accuses me of. If he thinks I'm setting a huge handicap for myself, then I'd just ask him to put up or shut up. If I'm digging my own grave, then once again, why isn't he salivating over the opportunity to show how weak a debator I am? I've already discussed the format and I'd be more than open to a priori adjustments. I'll give him a little time if he wants, although I don't quite buy his "I'm too busy to reply" response since he posted to the forums at 9:02 AM, 10:05 AM, 5:33 PM, 5:35 PM, 5:41 PM, 5:43 PM 7:21 PM. Surely there was a moment for a courteous reply...

Message edited by author 2010-06-23 22:51:00.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

06/23/2010 11:16:15 PM · #384

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I'm not trying to rig the results like Shannon unfairly accuses me of. If he thinks I'm setting a huge handicap for myself, then I'd just ask him to put up or shut up. If I'm digging my own grave, then once again, why isn't he salivating over the opportunity to show how weak a debator I am?

Put up or shut up yourself. I've challenged you to debate religion without resorting to fallacy several times, and you haven't taken me up on it yet. Funny how you can leave that dare hanging for weeks, but call me chicken or discourteous for not jumping immediately. :-/

Message edited by author 2010-06-23 23:16:36.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

06/23/2010 11:39:20 PM · #385

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'm not trying to rig the results like Shannon unfairly accuses me of. If he thinks I'm setting a huge handicap for myself, then I'd just ask him to put up or shut up. If I'm digging my own grave, then once again, why isn't he salivating over the opportunity to show how weak a debator I am?

Put up or shut up yourself. I've challenged you to debate religion without resorting to fallacy several times, and you haven't taken me up on it yet. Funny how you can leave that dare hanging for weeks, but call me chicken or discourteous for not jumping immediately. :-/

OK! Let's do it! But let's pick a specific topic and let's have a back and forth so that you can easily point out my fallacies and explain them to everybody. Do you have a specific resolution you want to discuss? "Resolved: Religion has been a positive force in human history" or something like that?

If you want me to present the affirmative then I will go first. I'll limit myself to, what, 25 lines? 50? (all posts will be subject to the same limit) You will then reply by presenting your own negative case while also addressing mine. I'll rebut. You rebut. I conclude. Traditionally the affirmative gets to go first and last since they have the more difficult task.

I suggest we do not allow linking as it would be a way around the line limit and prevents someone from simply trying to overwhelm the other with data. You are welcome to quote sources, but the quotation should either stand on its own or be explained within your argument.

I'm open to a topic you feel I have neglected in the past as well.

I am officially "taking you up" on your challenge and apologize if I have somehow missed such an invitation.

raish

Olympus C-2500L

06/24/2010 04:45:00 AM · #386

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

"Resolved: Religion has been a positive force in human history"

What's to discuss? Surely no one would argue that it is exclusively positive. Then there's the problem of human history being written by victors and incumbents.

Apple iPhone 5

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

06/24/2010 05:18:28 AM · #387

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

OK! Let's do it!

Jerry! ... Jerry! ... Jerry! ... Jerry!

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

06/24/2010 06:15:47 AM · #388

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

"Resolved: Religion has been a positive force in human history"

Originally posted by raish:

What's to discuss? Surely no one would argue that it is exclusively positive. Then there's the problem of human history being written by victors and incumbents.

Resolved: Religion has been a destructive force in human history.

With crucifictions, holy wars, and the casting out/away the non-believers through the centuries in the name of many different religions, it's easy to make a case for this resolution as well.

So I'm thinking that the debate would be whether the positive influence outweighs the negative. And......since in theory, all religions eschew the decent and kind treatment of one another, how is it that religion is responsible for so much strife in its name?

one2one

Olympus E-5

Olympus 7-14mm f/4.0 Zuiko Digital Zoom

06/24/2010 10:06:22 AM · #389

How exciting this thread has become....

You guys are putting me to sleep and I don't want to sleep, I want to laugh at the other side's baseless reasons for believing. Come on boys, discuss. :)

Here's something to think about.

Christians and Muslims bury their dead with holy ceremonies and rituals that they hold dear to their hearts and believe it's a path to their heavens or final resting places making death an act of God.

Zoroastrians believed that carrying their dead to a hilltop and letting vultures eat them because they believed that the dead were impure and that the deaths were the work of the devil.

Which religion is right? One religion says the dead go to heaven and another says they go to hell. Which religion should I choose if I were looking for one to choose, that is?

Zoroastrianism isn't around much today, it was based mostly in Persia and was pushed aside by Islam in the 7th century. It was once a popular religion in that part of the world.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

06/24/2010 10:26:36 AM · #390

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
"Resolved: Religion has been a positive force in human history"

Originally posted by raish:
What's to discuss? Surely no one would argue that it is exclusively positive. Then there's the problem of human history being written by victors and incumbents.

Resolved: Religion has been a destructive force in human history.

With crucifictions, holy wars, and the casting out/away the non-believers through the centuries in the name of many different religions, it's easy to make a case for this resolution as well.

So I'm thinking that the debate would be whether the positive influence outweighs the negative. And......since in theory, all religions eschew the decent and kind treatment of one another, how is it that religion is responsible for so much strife in its name?

This would be exactly why one could have a structured debate about such things. There are arguments to be had on both sides. The "resolved" sentence is merely a starting point and shows who is going to be affirmative and who is going to be negative. Look at some of the awesome topics that have been discussed in formal LD debate this year:

Resolved: Compulsory inclusion of non-felons' DNA in any government database is unjust. (NFL Nationals 2010)
Resolved: That the United States government has a moral obligation to afford the same constitutional rights to all people on United States soil. (NCFL Nationals 2010)
Resolved: In the United States, the principle of jury nullification is a just check on government. (March/April 2010)
Resolved: Economic sanctions ought not be used to achieve foreign policy objectives. (January/February 2010)
Resolved: Public health concerns justify compulsory immunization. (November/December 2009)
Resolved: Public high school students in the United States ought not be required to pass standardized exit exams to graduate. (September/October 2009)

But notice how just bringing up the topic has fragmented the thread into multiple discussions. Does one address Raish? Jeb? Jac is still on the previous topic. etc. etc. It doesn't seem to work well.

Message edited by author 2010-06-24 10:28:54.

Apple iPhone 5

06/24/2010 11:42:45 AM · #391

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Does one address Raish? Jeb? Jac is still on the previous topic. etc. etc. It doesn't seem to work well.

Not to mention my Jerry Springer reference; a feeble attempt to weave a subtle sub-plot of dry wit into the thread.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

06/24/2010 12:19:09 PM · #392

Originally posted by JH:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Does one address Raish? Jeb? Jac is still on the previous topic. etc. etc. It doesn't seem to work well.

Not to mention my Jerry Springer reference; a feeble attempt to weave a subtle sub-plot of dry wit into the thread.

Oh snap. I actually thought it was Jerry Seinfeld for some reason or Jerry Lewis next. ;) Well, see, the whole system clearly doesn't work when I can't even get a humor reference!!!

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

06/24/2010 12:55:42 PM · #393

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

"Resolved: Religion has been a positive force in human history"

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Resolved: Religion has been a destructive force in human history.

So I'm thinking that the debate would be whether the positive influence outweighs the negative. And......since in theory, all religions eschew the decent and kind treatment of one another, how is it that religion is responsible for so much strife in its name?

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Well, I have to say that I was interested in the discussion of the various merits of both sides, not that I was specifically in one camp or the other. I have found that any subject is more interesting if you look at it from both sides and consider both carefully. That's part of the reason I seem to end up on the negative side of most religious discussions. I refuse to ignore the careful, and reasoned, issues that so many people have with religion. Unfortunately, most of the religions seem to never want to discuss the weak points of their various schools of thought, which IMNSHO, is one of the things that gets them into trouble. Because I ask them, I get labeled as a negative type simply because I'll ask, "Why?".

For instance, it seems just crazy to me that God, as in the Christian God, would not want us to evolve and grow in our societies as long as we remember to be good and decent to each other. I cannot believe that he wouldn't want us to learn about things as we get more accomplished and smarter in all that we do, there fore allowing things like the pork abomination, and ergotism, to go by the wayside as we learn and progress as humans.

I knw that my church has been going out of its way to try to invite, and interest people of all cultures to join us at our church as a part of the community where qwe all share each other's interests and growth more than as an attempt to convert them via specific creeds and dogma.

Somehow, I think Jesus would approve.......8>)

Nullix

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

06/25/2010 01:11:00 PM · #394

I didn't know which thread to post to, but this is to funny.

Atheists Don't Have No Songs -- Steve Martin with the Steep Canyon Rangers

I love Steve Martin.

06/25/2010 01:24:14 PM · #395

Originally posted by Nullix:

I didn't know which thread to post to, but this is to funny.

Atheists Don't Have No Songs -- Steve Martin with the Steep Canyon Rangers

I love Steve Martin.

That was cute. Just yesterday I was watching Steve do some banjo on YouTube. He's pretty good. I usually include Martin in my "three people you'd invite to dinner" list.