|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Your EvC Debate Dream Team - Fantasy Debating | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4046 Joined: Member Rating: 7.4 |
Can you still count NemJug? Considering he's no longer a Creationist?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Fair point. If Hyro cannot bring himself to be NemJugs again then Syamsu can take his place.
Let the madness begin....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vacate Member (Idle past 4629 days) Posts: 565 Joined:
|
Dr. Adequate
lyx2no Percy My first two choices deliver with sarcasm and wit but behind all that is a wealth of knowledge. Percy to clean up the mess at the end with a calm clear explanation about why the first two so effectively made fun of their opponent. Its all in the delivery, I like to laugh.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
No place for Ray Martinez (aka "Willowtree" and "ColdForeignObject) on your team ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Never someone I personally encountered to any great extent.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3991 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
Smart, knowledgeable, articulate, etc.--qualities that apply to many, many more EvCers apply to my choices.
Dr. Adequate: Ultra-sharp analysis on almost anything expressible in words or math; disciplined and funny. bluegenes: Deep, bold thinker; genial and deadly. jar: Rare breadth of knowledge, hell on logical flaws; grumpy and deadly. I could put together a dozen teams, though, without breaking a sweat and with full confidence. For example, I'd parallel that team with: Percy: Polymath. In complete control. Straggler: Implacable. Relentless. Drinks. ringo: Letter for letter, the best. In fact, I'd prefer those threesomes fight it out. I'll moderate and drink. Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale? -Shakespeare Real things always push back.-William James
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Omni writes: Straggler: ......., Drinks. An essential quality in any debate partner. Obviously. Hic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3991 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
Indubabitly, occifer, but I olny had one.
Fair caution: As a debate partner, I might shred the opposition's arguments--or fly across the stage to chew their throats. I'd depend on my team to tell me what is appropriate. Edited by Omnivorous, : hic Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale? -Shakespeare Real things always push back.-William James
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
But when discussing with a creationist, rarely is it someone other then the creationist who reveals factual falsehoods or logical fallacies from an evolutionist in the discussion. I have never, ever observed a bunch of evolutionists correcting one of their own in a discussion with a creationist. Message 69 Message 715 Message 248 Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given. Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4669 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
Sorry I never cam back to this, totally forgot about it.
It isn't my issue with creationism, it's yours, or rather, it's the most significant problem faced by creationism: there's no theoretical framework. That you have a cacophony of opinion preventing creationist cooperation in threads is just a side effect. The real issue is that if you want to replace evolution then you have to interpret the available evidence within some theoretical framework. Unfortunately there's no discernible scientific framework that is shared by creationists. As I had said, this is because you use such a large definition of ''creationist'' that you are bound to incorporate different interprative frameworks, while you compare it with a more restrictive definition of evolutionist with only one interprative framework (Neo-Darwinian evolution). But if you compare apples with apples, meaning a group of people who share the same framework to another group who share the same framework, you'll basically observe the same things in terms of agreement/disagreement. They'll all agree on the core ideas and the very straightforward interpretations of some facts, and you'll be bound to find a subgroup who disagrees with the majority on pretty much all the rest. Example: Young earth creationist all share the same interprative framework, and so for example they will agree that the grand canyon was carved during the flood. However, how and when this was done is a subject of disagreement. Was it by the breached-dam theory ? Or by the receding floodwaters ? etc.
Not only do creationists have no scientific framework, there's not even a creationist consensus around any kind of framework. Is the Bible absolutely literally inerrant? Mostly literally inerrant? Somewhat literally inerrant? Not literally inerrant, but God created species, not evolution? Is God Christian? Moslem? Hindu? Semitic? Buddhist? This is a matter of where a given group get their interprative framework. Is it from the Quran, the Bible, etc. ? Obviously, different sources will give different interprative frameworks. And, as you highlight, the same source can give different frameworks. Christians read genesis today and interpret it in wildly different ways sometimes, and this leads to different frameworks. On this fact, I can concede that you have a point that there is an 'extra level' of disagreement. But even then, it has little to do with the ambiguity of the text itself, but rather how much weight a given person gives to modern scientific theories in interprating the text. (since before the 18th century, there was basically only the YEC interpretation). In any case, this has little relevance. A given framework should be judged on it's own merit, not from where it comes and how it was invented. The contrary is simply the genetic fallacy.
Creationists have one unifying principle: evolution is wrong. They disagree about everything else. They disagree about how it is wrong (they rarely understand how evolution even works), and they disagree about where the rest of science is wrong, and when they agree about that they disagree about how it is wrong. Maybe when using such a large definition of creationism as to make it meaningless, this may be true. (and in fact, it isn't, since you included budhism into it which does just fine with evolution) But you are wrong when looking at a particular framework. The unifying principle of YEC is their common interpretation of genesis. They oppose evolution because it comes in direct contradiction with the frameworkd they think is true.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4669 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
Hi CS,
I never said an evolutionists never corrects another, even though I think it happens rarely considering the number of logical fallacies that come and go in a discussion. What I did say was that you never observe the sort of tag-teaming Taz was talking about.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: So what you are saying is that if you do a "fair" comparison, ignoring the unity among evolutionists and the disunity of creationists, creationists agree as much as evolutionists. That makes about as much sense as your old objection to treating the Bible as a historical document on the grounds that it should be treated as a historical document !
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4669 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
So what you are saying is that if you do a "fair" comparison, ignoring the unity among evolutionists and the disunity of creationists, creationists agree as much as evolutionists. Not at all. I'm saying that equivocating words is a logical fallacy. This is clearly justified when someone uses a definition of creationist so large as to include Buddhism. (which is an atheistic religion if I remember correctly)
That makes about as much sense as your old objection to treating the Bible as a historical document on the grounds that it should be treated as a historical document ! Nice strawman, the Bible should be treated as a historical document because it is a historical document. Are you really against this ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9199 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2 |
I never said an evolutionists never corrects another, even though I think it happens rarely considering the number of logical fallacies that come and go in a discussion.
No, no that isn't what you said. You clearly said that "Evolutionists" never correct each other.And isn't it cute how you accuse "evolutionists" of using logical fallacies, without actually saying it. Very dishonest debating. slevesque writes:
Message 99 Maybe when discussing between themselves, evolutionist do correct each other. But when discussing with a creationist, rarely is it someone other then the creationist who reveals factual falsehoods or logical fallacies from an evolutionist in the discussion. I have never, ever observed a bunch of evolutionists correcting one of their own in a discussion with a creationist. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4669 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
No, no that isn't what you said. You clearly said that "Evolutionists" never correct each other. When I say rarely, it doesn't mean never ...
And isn't it cute how you accuse "evolutionists" of using logical fallacies, without actually saying it. Very dishonest debating. Everyone uses logical fallacies, it's just a matter of no one being perfect. I can easily say this about everybody from every worldview on this forum, including myself.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024