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

killtheBuddha
Initiate

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

Posted 12/10/07 - 10:23 AM:	#251
PontificatingChauncy wrote: Yes, I did. Then i suppose we have to await approval before we can do this, Chauncey.

Caldwell
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 18, 2006
Location: Under the banana tree, with Zuleiha.
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 1306

Posted 12/10/07 - 11:54 PM:	#252
So, what have you and chauncy decided to debate, killthebuddha?
_____________________ So, you've finally figured out how reality works.

killtheBuddha
Initiate

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

Posted 12/11/07 - 08:49 AM:	#253
Caldwell wrote: So, what have you and chauncy decided to debate, killthebuddha? absolute truth, Caldwell.

killtheBuddha
Initiate

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

Posted 12/11/07 - 08:51 AM:	#254
killtheBuddha wrote: absolute truth, Caldwell. its existence, that is

Caldwell
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 18, 2006
Location: Under the banana tree, with Zuleiha.
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 1306

Posted 12/11/07 - 11:30 PM:	#255
Looking forward to it.
_____________________ So, you've finally figured out how reality works.

PontificatingChauncy
Student (aren't we all?)

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 192

Posted 12/12/07 - 05:39 AM:	#256
So, now that I've sent in the form, do I just wait? How long will the PM take to reach me?
_____________________ 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 12/12/07 - 07:05 AM:	#257
PontificatingChauncy wrote: So, now that I've sent in the form, do I just wait? How long will the PM take to reach me? I don't know, PC. I'm new to this myself, having only joined the forums a couple of weeks ago; I suppose so. I was in the process of returning your PM, by the way, when my computer went on the fritz. The topics covered in my PM to you were: (1) self-refutation and fallacious reasoning in your argument, (2) both heliocentrism and the Earth's roundness as scientific and objective facts, and (3) oversights on your part concerning some aspects of Einstein's theory of relativity. Incidentally, you're free to correct any misunderstandings I might have of your arguments during the debate (or earlier) if you'd like, PC. Edited by killtheBuddha on 12/12/07 - 08:51 AM

PontificatingChauncy
Student (aren't we all?)

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 192

Posted 12/14/07 - 10:08 AM:	#258
About point two: did I mention heliocentrism? I went an re-read my PM, but I still had some trouble following myself. Also, that was only part of my pre-written post. I'm just far, far too lazy to finish it w/o a confirmation from a mod.
_____________________ 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 12/14/07 - 11:20 AM:	#259
PontificatingChauncy wrote: About point two: did I mention heliocentrism? I went an re-read my PM, but I still had some trouble following myself. Also, that was only part of my pre-written post. I'm just far, far too lazy to finish it w/o a confirmation from a mod. No, you didn't. That part of my reply was one of my arguments AGAINST the statements in your PM. Also, I don't understand whether what you've just said is intended to be sarcastic or not. If not, I'd like you to send me the other part of your reply, please.

PontificatingChauncy
Student (aren't we all?)

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 192

Posted 12/14/07 - 12:17 PM:	#260
Well, I literally haven't written it. When I do, I'll send it.
_____________________ 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 12/14/07 - 02:40 PM:	#261
PontificatingChauncy wrote: Well, I literally haven't written it. When I do, I'll send it. OK, thanks.

killtheBuddha
Initiate

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

Posted 12/21/07 - 10:05 PM: Subject: ?	#262
PC or anyone else, any news on our debate? Have we been approved?

PontificatingChauncy
Student (aren't we all?)

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 192

Posted 12/23/07 - 08:58 PM:	#263
I haven't heard anything. But then again, it's Christmas.
_____________________ 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 12/23/07 - 10:49 PM:	#264
PontificatingChauncy wrote: I haven't heard anything. But then again, it's Christmas. Good point, PC; later and have a merry Christmas and a happy new year.

PontificatingChauncy
Student (aren't we all?)

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 192

Posted 12/24/07 - 11:18 AM:	#265
And a Merry... uhm, a Happy... uhm... have a joyful Buddha killing? ...
_____________________ 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 12/24/07 - 08:26 PM:	#266
PontificatingChauncy wrote: And a Merry... uhm, a Happy... uhm... have a joyful Buddha killing? ... LOL!!! It's OK, PC, my family celebrates Christmas; thanks!

Tisthammerw
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Location: Minnesota
Total Topics: 6
Total Posts: 706

Posted 02/23/08 - 02:34 PM:

#267

Hmm, not many posts here as of late. Oh well, I'll give this a shot anyway.

Whether materialism undermines rationality (I believe it does)
Whether compatibilism is true (I believe it is incoherent and mistaken)
Whether the strong AI thesis is true (I believe it is false)
Whether objective moral values are evidence for the existence of God (I believe they are)

Just in case someone reading this is unfamiliar with the terminology,

Compatibilism is the belief that free will and determinism are compatible.
Strong AI is the thesis that an appropriately programmed computer can literally think, understand, possess consciousness, and have other cognitive states.

_____________________
Knowing is half the battle; the other half is a really big gun.

Lex
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 17, 2008
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 158

Posted 03/17/08 - 07:57 PM:	#268
Tisthammerw wrote: Hmm, not many posts here as of late. Oh well, I'll give this a shot anyway. Whether materialism undermines rationality (I believe it does) Whether compatibilism is true (I believe it is incoherent and mistaken) Whether the strong AI thesis is true (I believe it is false) Whether objective moral values are evidence for the existence of God (I believe they are) Just in case someone reading this is unfamiliar with the terminology, Compatibilism is the belief that free will and determinism are compatible. Strong AI is the thesis that an appropriately programmed computer can literally think, understand, possess consciousness, and have other cognitive states. Is this thread ever checked? This is an old post, but is this where you respond to invitations for debate? Tisthammerw: (If somebody already responded to you via pm or the like, then sorry I don't know how to check) I disagree with you on everything except the first topic, for which I would need more description to decide. If the debate option is still open, of course.

Paul
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Mar 10, 2002
Location: California
Total Topics: 451
Total Posts: 11511

Posted 03/19/08 - 04:43 PM:	#269
It's up to you to determine whether someone who posted long ago is still alive via PM, then do as described in the pinned thread.
_____________________ "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

loveofsophia
Understanding

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 02, 2006
Location: Near Madison in Wisconsin
Total Topics: 34
Total Posts: 557

Posted 04/14/08 - 04:03 PM:	#270
I want to debate on the relative power of argument to persuade and not persuade, arguing that the relative process and context of the arguer determines how much they can "learn" through argument (you can't actually win an argument when the other fails to arrive at your conclusion. This means we can include a debate over what the best expectations are when engaging in an argument and the methods best employed in doing so. Maybe I should think on this one some more. Doesn't seem like an obvious division in views is readily available. I also want to argue for a pluralistic stance on myth vs. philosophy/science, meaning, the truth contest between the two is problematic given they are both different systems of understanding the world (philosophy does things myth/religion cannot and vice versa). I would prefer to debate this with someone that finds no value in the myth/religious inclinations of humankind. PM me if your interested in taking a position on any of those...or just to discuss them a little to figure out if you are interested (or just to talk about them, I guess). Edited by loveofsophia on 04/21/08 - 12:46 AM
_____________________ It is amazing how susceptible to lies we are when young. I believe people are still far more susceptible to lies as adults than they would like. Balancing what could be, our imaginings, with what we know, this is a delicate act of mind.

Buddahchuck
Bodhisatva

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 16, 2006
Total Topics: 21
Total Posts: 527

Posted 04/14/08 - 04:40 PM:	#271
I want to debate something!!! I'll take any stance. I really want to test my argumentative prowess!!! Top topics (I guess typical topics always start off "Resolved that") -Metaphysical truths are possible -Idealism is a more beneficial belief than Realism. -There is no discernible distinction between Quantity and Quality (Nature of Mathematics in a physical world) -Epistemology is an antiquated philosophical course of study. -Texas (and everything associated with it) should be banished from the Union (NB Just in case we're looking for something controversial). Of course, any suggestions are more than welcome.

Tisthammerw
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Location: Minnesota
Total Topics: 6
Total Posts: 706

Posted 04/18/08 - 04:46 PM:	#272
Previously, Tisthammerw wrote: Hmm, not many posts here as of late. Oh well, I'll give this a shot anyway. Whether materialism undermines rationality (I believe it does) Whether compatibilism is true (I believe it is incoherent and mistaken) Whether the strong AI thesis is true (I believe it is false) Whether objective moral values are evidence for the existence of God (I believe they are) Just in case someone reading this is unfamiliar with the terminology, Compatibilism is the belief that free will and determinism are compatible. Strong AI is the thesis that an appropriately programmed computer can literally think, understand, possess consciousness, and have other cognitive states. Lex wrote, Lex wrote: Tisthammerw: (If somebody already responded to you via pm or the like, then sorry I don't know how to check) I disagree with you on everything except the first topic, for which I would need more description to decide. If the debate option is still open, of course. At last, a taker. I hope Lex is still around... For the first option, I argue if materialism is true than it undermines rationality in at least two senses: (1) if materialism were true our beliefs would not be the product of rational thought but of e.g. mindless chemical reactions and (2) we would not have rational grounds for accepting our beliefs. This argument however depends on compatibilism being false (and on that I base the claim that if materialism were true, neither my mind nor any other mind is in control of my beliefs; instead the forces that determine my beliefs have no mind, and thus the forces that determine my beliefs are mindless). So if you disagree with my claim on compatibilism perhaps it's best we avoid that issue anyway.
_____________________ Knowing is half the battle; the other half is a really big gun.

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

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.