Debate Topics, Challenges and Scheduling: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Debates » Debate Discussion » Debate Topics, Challenges and Scheduling » Debate Topics, Challenges and Scheduling

Debate Topics, Challenges and Scheduling

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Debate Topics, Challenges and Scheduling

Paul
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Mar 10, 2002
Location: California
Total Topics: 455
Total Posts: 11603

Posted 09/27/07 - 06:00 PM:	#226
Since you can't construct topics of more than one line, or write that one line in decent english, or spell many of the words in the above post, you won't be doing a debate here. Walk before you run. Or at least crawl.
_____________________ "If a statement is made, it is to be confronted with the totality of existing statements. If it agrees with them, it is joined to them; if it does not agree, it is called 'untrue' and rejected; or the existing complex of statements of science is modified so that the new statement can be incorporated." - Otto Neurath

andrew17
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 27, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 18

Posted 09/27/07 - 07:11 PM:	#227
Paul wrote: Since you can't construct topics of more than one line, or write that one line in decent english, or spell many of the words in the above post, you won't be doing a debate here. Walk before you run. Or at least crawl. I find your criticism intresting because it is only 3 sentences long and one of those sentences is a run on sentence. Also the last two thoughts should be joined by a comma not a period. Here is your post in "decent english". Since you can't construct topics of more than one line, write that one line in decent english, or spell many of the words in the above post you won't be doing a debate here. Walk before you run, or at least crawl.

sqeecoo
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 05, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 136

Posted 10/06/07 - 11:51 AM:	#228
DMR wrote: Whether God exists. (no) Whether the atheistic or the agnostic position is more tenable. (atheist) I'd be interested in debating these, as I seem to disagree with you. At the very least, I would be very interested in your arguments on these two topics. I am also interested in discussing aim, method, rationality and truth in science. Here, I am a Popperian: I think the aim of science is truth, that its method is that of conjectures and refutations, that it is rational, and that we can never know that our theories are true. EDIT: I would also be happy to try to show that homosexuality is either a disease or a psychological disorder. Other than that, I don't think there is anything wrong with it. EDIT2: Oh and this also sound interesting: Whether mind is a distinct substance from body. (no it isn't) I think it very well might be. Edited by sqeecoo on 10/06/07 - 12:55 PM

Mr.Anonymous
Secret Agent

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 05, 2007
Location: A higher realm (a.k.a. Philosophy Forums)
Total Topics: 28
Total Posts: 612

Last Blog:

Posted 10/10/07 - 06:06 PM:	#229
I'm up for another debate: Whether human beings are entitled to civil rights and political freedoms, or only have access to such through the efforts of governments. I would argue that they only have access to civil rights and political freedoms through government. Note: I believe that my last debate was rather unsuccessful due to the lack of difference in opinion on the issue. In this new debate I propose, there would be tremendous difference of opinion and thereby more interesting dialogue.
_____________________ Freedom is thought. Fear is weakness. Information is power.

sqeecoo
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 05, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 136

Posted 10/10/07 - 06:20 PM:	#230
Hm, I don't see your point really. Are there some absolute rights human beings have? I have no idea. Do we need to give them these rights within a government? Yes. I'm afraid there wouldn't be much difference in opinion here between you and me. I, however, completely disagree with what you were saying in that debate, for a very simple reason: we don't have an effective way to select and maintain a ruling elite.

Mr.Anonymous
Secret Agent

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 05, 2007
Location: A higher realm (a.k.a. Philosophy Forums)
Total Topics: 28
Total Posts: 612

Last Blog:

Posted 10/11/07 - 04:40 PM:	#231
sqeecoo wrote: I, however, completely disagree with what you were saying in that debate, for a very simple reason: we don't have an effective way to select and maintain a ruling elite. I was refering to my debate about the Ethics of Eating Meat. Do we need to give them these rights within a government? Yes. That's one thing I'd also dispute, though I am in favor of the government giving citizens rights regardless. I'm afraid there wouldn't be much difference in opinion here between you and me. I'll seek another then, though I appreciate the offer. If there was one.
_____________________ Freedom is thought. Fear is weakness. Information is power.

sqeecoo
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 05, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 136

Posted 10/12/07 - 05:12 AM:	#232
Mr.Anonymous wrote: I was refering to my debate about the Ethics of Eating Meat. Ah, I see. Well, I almost completely agree with you in that debate. But wasn't there an nearly identical debate on the political topic you are offering? How about a nice discussion on truth and epistemology, for a change? Although I would be quite willing to debate elitism vs. democracy. I don't quite get what you mean by: "That's one thing I'd also dispute, though I am in favor of the government giving citizens rights regardless." Of course the government does not have to give rights to citizens, but it is the best way to govern.

DMR
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 23, 2005
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 75

Posted 10/13/07 - 02:02 AM:	#233
sqeecoo wrote: I'd be interested in debating these, as I seem to disagree with you. If you think that God exists, I think our debate on whether atheism or agnosticism is more tenable will be somewhat beside the point. I am a Popperian I adamantly disagree with Popper. This might work. Whether mind is a distinct substance from body. (no it isn't) I think it very well might be. I think this would probably be the best. Mr.Anonymous wrote: I'm up for another debate: Whether human beings are entitled to civil rights and political freedoms, or only have access to such through the efforts of governments. I would argue that they only have access to civil rights and political freedoms through government. I could debate this one, but your side is basically dead in the water.

Mr.Anonymous
Secret Agent

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 05, 2007
Location: A higher realm (a.k.a. Philosophy Forums)
Total Topics: 28
Total Posts: 612

Last Blog:

Posted 10/14/07 - 09:12 PM:	#234
sqeecoo wrote: Ah, I see. Well, I almost completely agree with you in that debate. Thank you. Of course, the problem was that there was too much agreement, and I should have expected that from Pwrong since he's quite moderate in this subject (which I approve of greatly, the world needs more moderates). If I was up against, say, Morkin, I would be debate an ideological opposite in this subject, and sparks would fly. But wasn't there an nearly identical debate on the political topic you are offering? How about a nice discussion on truth and epistemology, for a change? Yes, I did have a debate on elite rule vs. popular rule. And maybe your right, perhaps I should have a less political oriented debate. Still, I want something that will make sparks fly so that I have a challenge. Perhaps you could PM me some issues on truth and your stances. Although I would be quite willing to debate elitism vs. democracy. I don't quite get what you mean by: "That's one thing I'd also dispute, though I am in favor of the government giving citizens rights regardless." Of course the government does not have to give rights to citizens, but it is the best way to govern. I perfectly agree with that. However, almost all the people I have ever known politically, and many more, would say that civil rights are something the masses will always have no matter what, as if it were entitled to them by God.
_____________________ Freedom is thought. Fear is weakness. Information is power.

Mr.Anonymous
Secret Agent

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 05, 2007
Location: A higher realm (a.k.a. Philosophy Forums)
Total Topics: 28
Total Posts: 612

Last Blog:

Posted 10/14/07 - 09:18 PM:	#235
DMR wrote: I could debate this one, but your side is basically dead in the water. How's that?
_____________________ Freedom is thought. Fear is weakness. Information is power.

sqeecoo
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 05, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 136

Posted 10/15/07 - 04:20 AM:	#236
Mr.Anonymous wrote: Yes, I did have a debate on elite rule vs. popular rule. And maybe your right, perhaps I should have a less political oriented debate. Still, I want something that will make sparks fly so that I have a challenge. Perhaps you could PM me some issues on truth and your stances. Great! As I said, I think the aim of science is truth, that its method is that of conjectures and refutations, that it is rational, and that we can never know that our theories are true. If you would like more detail we can use PMs, sure. Just tell me (via PM if you like) what you want to know. @DMR I would say God existed if someone asked me how I felt. In a philosophical debate, I would never defend the existence of God, as I think it is a matter of faith, not of reason. As a person interested in truth (a "scientist"), I would claim that agnosticism is the only tenable position. If you adamantly disagree with Popper, I'd be very interested in hearing your reasons, whether in a debate or somewhere else. That would be the topic I would choose. On the "mind is a distinct substance from body" topic I am not sure how much we would disagree. I would not claim that there are two kinds of "substances" (whatever that is), but I will argue that a) claiming that the human consciousness can or will be reduced to chem. processes in the brain is premature and prophetic, and b) that there are non-material "objects" that can be objectively studied just like material objects - rocks, for example. An example of such a non-material object would be a scientific theory.

DMR
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 23, 2005
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 75

Posted 10/15/07 - 10:47 PM:	#237
Mr.Anonymous wrote: How's that? It commits you to extreme moral relativism.

sqeecoo
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 05, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 136

Posted 10/20/07 - 07:48 AM:	#238
So, DMR, are you up for a debate?

DMR
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 23, 2005
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 75

Posted 10/26/07 - 01:42 AM:	#239
Sure. You handle the request.

sqeecoo
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 05, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 136

Posted 10/26/07 - 12:50 PM:	#240
Great! So what did we say we will debate? Truth and scientific method? If you have the time you could "handle the request" as I have no idea how to go about it. I can figure it out, of course, but if you already know all about it, go ahead and do it if you don't mind.

killtheBuddha
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 16

Posted 12/05/07 - 09:43 AM: Subject: Debate Challenge	#241
Klaatu wrote: I'll be eligible for debate in a few weeks. Pleased to debate on any issue in aesthetics, and on other topics too as long as I am at least familiar with the arguments. Hello, i'm FreeofMind. I'm eager 2 debate on epistemological relativism. Are yo up 4 it?

killtheBuddha
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 16

Posted 12/05/07 - 09:49 AM:	#242
sorry, i meant i'm killtheBuddha

killtheBuddha
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 16

Posted 12/05/07 - 10:10 AM:	#243
Hello, i'm killtheBuddha, and i'm wondering if anyone would like 2 debate the existence of absolute truth w/ me. I already take the affirmative; does any1 argue the negative? Any1 is welcome 2 take up my offer.

Caldwell
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 18, 2006
Location: Under the banana tree, with Zuleiha.
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 1368

Posted 12/07/07 - 01:31 AM:	#244
killtheBuddha, But, if you're going to debate do you promise not to write like that? Because you write "Any1" instead of "Anyone", and you say "2 debate" instead of "to debate", "4 it" instead of "for it".
_____________________ I achieved nothing. ---The Optimist

killtheBuddha
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 16

Posted 12/07/07 - 07:21 AM:	#245
Caldwell wrote: killtheBuddha, But, if you're going to debate do you promise not to write like that? Because you write "Any1" instead of "Anyone", and you say "2 debate" instead of "to debate", "4 it" instead of "for it". sure; now, will anyone accept my challenge?

PontificatingChauncy
Student (aren't we all?)

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 219

Posted 12/08/07 - 11:27 PM:	#246
Sure, killtheBuddha, I'll take you up. I'm available anytime starting monday, between 1pm-5am Eastern Standard time (United States). Just please, we'll do what ever you want, but just don't kill the Buddha!
_____________________ The Tao that can be named is not the true Tao. That thing is a chauncy

killtheBuddha
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 16

Posted 12/09/07 - 07:13 AM:	#247
PontificatingChauncy wrote: Sure, killtheBuddha, I'll take you up. I'm available anytime starting monday, between 1pm-5am Eastern Standard time (United States). Just please, we'll do what ever you want, but just don't kill the Buddha! Good, because i neglected to mention that the first one who accepts my challenge gets to debate me; see you then!

PontificatingChauncy
Student (aren't we all?)

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 219

Posted 12/09/07 - 02:10 PM:	#248
Monday, one pm Eastern Standard then?
_____________________ The Tao that can be named is not the true Tao. That thing is a chauncy

killtheBuddha
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 04, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 16

Posted 12/09/07 - 04:55 PM:	#249
PontificatingChauncy wrote: Monday, one pm Eastern Standard then? sure; did you fill out the form?

PontificatingChauncy
Student (aren't we all?)

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 219

Posted 12/10/07 - 10:18 AM:	#250
Yes, I did.
_____________________ The Tao that can be named is not the true Tao. That thing is a chauncy

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.