Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I rep you for your keen grasp of the obvious No one wants to be exposed.....hence....no takers....just obfuscation and misdirection.
I don't have a problem debating anything, I just didn't like the premise of it. It seemed more like you wanted to boost your ego than actually gain any knowledge.
I don't have a problem debating anything, I just didn't like the premise of it. It seemed more like you wanted to boost your ego than actually gain any knowledge.
Don’t you suppose that a bigger boost to my ego would manifest from people not choosing to debate? If I were a mixed martial artist, do you think I would get a bigger ego trip off of defeating an opponent or people being too afraid to fight me? My ego really has nothing to do with I am being completely sincere about my motives. If you feel my motives are ego gains, maybe it’s just simply the projected corollary of one who fears a loss of ego from participation….or maybe you debate for an ego trip and project your motives to be mine. I don’t have any way to know, all I know is that this is not about me, but rather, standing up for the integrity and reputation of black people from the CONSTANT implying of black inferiority…….implicit via denying or granting deference to the history of racism.
Why all the FEAR? Why all the misdirection? Why all the obfuscation? Its like... "You did not dot your "i".....so its a flawed proposition. "you are just ego tripping"....so I am not going to participate. "It rained today" so that means your full of crap!
Don’t you suppose that a bigger boost to my ego would manifest from people not choosing to debate? If I were a mixed martial artist, do you think I would get a bigger ego trip off of defeating an opponent or people being too afraid to fight me? My ego really has nothing to do with I am being completely sincere about my motives. If you feel my motives are ego gains, maybe it’s just simply the projected corollary of one who fears a loss of ego from participation….or maybe you debate for an ego trip and project your motives to be mine. I don’t have any way to know, all I know is that this is not about me, but rather, standing up for the integrity and reputation of black people from the CONSTANT implying of black inferiority…….implicit via denying or granting deference to the history of racism.
Why all the FEAR? Why all the misdirection? Why all the obfuscation? Its like... "You did not dot your "i".....so its a flawed proposition. "you are just ego tripping"....so I am not going to participate. "It rained today" so that means your full of crap!
I find it hard to "lose" a debate considering I don't think of it as a contest.
I said early on I was willing to debate any issue at hand, but I didn't see any point in it if it was to "win". A debate based on winning or losing is in itself a loss, in my opinion.
I also find it odd to set out to discuss with a single person on a public forum, based around the concept of participation of many, but that's another story.
If I'm wrong, and you only come of as a condescending ego tripper, I apologize, however I do not fear any topic nor loss of ego. I don't define myself on how I fare in online discussion.
I find it hard to "lose" a debate considering I don't think of it as a contest.
I said early on I was willing to debate any issue at hand, but I didn't see any point in it if it was to "win". A debate based on winning or losing is in itself a loss, in my opinion.
I also find it odd to set out to discuss with a single person on a public forum, based around the concept of participation of many, but that's another story.
If I'm wrong, and you only come of as a condescending ego tripper, I apologize, however I do not fear any topic nor loss of ego. I don't define myself on how I fare in online discussion.
Have you ever heard of a debate team? If one argument is more valid than the other, more supported than the other, more factual than the other, less conjectured than the other…..then it has won the argument if one considers truth to be greater than falsity. If one sees truth and falsity as inherently equal…..then yes…..a debate cannot and should not be viewed as being won or lost.
It’s not odd to discuss with a single person. It’s more manageable when you debate with a single person. Do you think that it is fair that 20 or 30 people are dissenting against one individual? Based upon the other debates in this “Great debate” forum, few, if any, took my side and I was being bombarded with rebuttals with no one to jump in on my side to respond to them. You see party of the problem with many people is that they cannot see and they don’t respect the position of the underdog. You refuse to see thing from the predicament of the underdog. Here I am the only person defending a position and you want and expect me to debate with 20 or 30 people. When I try to create a non arbitrary method for choosing who I would debate with, that was attacked for its imperfections. It’s not like I have thousands of post on this forum to know where and how reputations points are given out. Yet, people have treated it as if I knew that reputation points came from forums that I have never even participated in. Again, it’s the unwillingness to respect were it is that I am coming from and that is what happens to black America as a whole. People refuse to respect where we are coming from because they cannot empathize with our situation and they don’t trust or respect us enough to accept what we tell them.
Go back and read my original post. I said that anyone could participate and respond but that I would only respond back to a particular person. That means that any proposition that I made ANYONE was free to refute it and the person I was debating may have thought that it was a good point and cosigned it and used it as a counter argument to mine. Alias, the truth is what I said before. People don’t really want to have this debate are just lying (or the euphemism “Excuse”) about the reason they will not participate.
Right now you are employing the ad hominem and straw man fallacy.....in your argument as to why you would not debate.
Have you ever heard of a debate team? If one argument is more valid than the other, more supported than the other, more factual than the other, less conjectured than the other…..then it has won the argument if one considers truth to be greater than falsity. If one sees truth and falsity as inherently equal…..then yes…..a debate cannot and should not be viewed as being won or lost.
It’s not odd to discuss with a single person. It’s more manageable when you debate with a single person. Do you think that it is fair that 20 or 30 people are dissenting against one individual? Based upon the other debates in this “Great debate” forum, few, if any, took my side and I was being bombarded with rebuttals with no one to jump in on my side to respond to them. You see party of the problem with many people is that they cannot see and they don’t respect the position of the underdog. You refuse to see thing from the predicament of the underdog. Here I am the only person defending a position and you want and expect me to debate with 20 or 30 people. When I try to create a non arbitrary method for choosing who I would debate with, that was attacked for its imperfections. It’s not like I have thousands of post on this forum to know where and how reputations points are given out. Yet, people have treated it as if I knew that reputation points came from forums that I have never even participated in. Again, it’s the unwillingness to respect were it is that I am coming from and that is what happens to black America as a whole. People refuse to respect where we are coming from because they cannot empathize with our situation and they don’t trust or respect us enough to accept what we tell them.
Go back and read my original post. I said that anyone could participate and respond but that I would only respond back to a particular person. That means that any proposition that I made ANYONE was free to refute it and the person I was debating may have thought that it was a good point and cosigned it and used it as a counter argument to mine. Alias, the truth is what I said before. People don’t really want to have this debate are just lying (or the euphemism “Excuse”) about the reason they will not participate.
Right now you are employing the ad hominem and straw man fallacy.....in your argument as to why you would not debate.
I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM DEBATING ANYTHING!
How many times do I have to type that before you get it?
As for debate teams, I'm not very familiar with them, as we don't have that here, but I was under the impression that they were judged on their "skills" not subject. (Ex: If someone does a great job of supporting fascism and the opposing "team" does a poor job of rebutting it, the first team wins, no matter how bad their viewpoint is.) If that's true, and what you want is to judge skill, then I'm probably not your man, I'm more interested in subject, and subjects aren't a simple matter or true or false and right or wrong.
Again, I get the impression that the only reason you debate (at least) this topic, is to persuade people to see it your way, to change their mind. That kind of arguing has a tendency to draw a lot of hostility.
And no, it's not odd to discuss with one person, but I would do it in it's proper setting, I wouldn't go to a political seminar and say "I will debate with only one of you on this topic, everyone else is free to comment but I will ignore you, no matter how good of a point you might raise."
As for fairness, come on, are we 3 years old and upset because everyone else has a spade and you don't? You reply to the posts you find most interesting or valid. The crazy ones you dismiss and let go, or you simply reply to several poster in one post, as they often have pretty much the same argument. That said, if you can't handle a group having an opposing view to you, you're probably better off not debating, at least on this site. If someone is rude, you can report the post.
Quote:
Again, it’s the unwillingness to respect were it is that I am coming from and that is what happens to black America as a whole. People refuse to respect where we are coming from because they cannot empathize with our situation and they don’t trust or respect us enough to accept what we tell them.
As for that, I might be reading it wrong, but if you're seriously indicating that I refuse to debate with you, something I don't btw, because you are black, you're so delusional I'm not sure what I could say that would matter at all.
As for your fancy latin, you are aware there's a fully functional English language you could use right?
And just to clarify, once more: I do NOT oppose debating with the person(you), I merely dislike the premise.
How many times do I have to type that before you get it?
As for debate teams, I'm not very familiar with them, as we don't have that here, but I was under the impression that they were judged on their "skills" not subject. (Ex: If someone does a great job of supporting fascism and the opposing "team" does a poor job of rebutting it, the first team wins, no matter how bad their viewpoint is.) If that's true, and what you want is to judge skill, then I'm probably not your man, I'm more interested in subject, and subjects aren't a simple matter or true or false and right or wrong.
Again, I get the impression that the only reason you debate (at least) this topic, is to persuade people to see it your way, to change their mind. That kind of arguing has a tendency to draw a lot of hostility.
And no, it's not odd to discuss with one person, but I would do it in it's proper setting, I wouldn't go to a political seminar and say "I will debate with only one of you on this topic, everyone else is free to comment but I will ignore you, no matter how good of a point you might raise."
As for fairness, come on, are we 3 years old and upset because everyone else has a spade and you don't? You reply to the posts you find most interesting or valid. The crazy ones you dismiss and let go, or you simply reply to several poster in one post, as they often have pretty much the same argument. That said, if you can't handle a group having an opposing view to you, you're probably better off not debating, at least on this site. If someone is rude, you can report the post.
As for that, I might be reading it wrong, but if you're seriously indicating that I refuse to debate with you, something I don't btw, because you are black, you're so delusional I'm not sure what I could say that would matter at all.
As for your fancy latin, you are aware there's a fully functional English language you could use right?
And just to clarify, once more: I do NOT oppose debating with the person(you), I merely dislike the premise.
Now lets see if third time's the charm.
You are exemplifying why I only sought to debate one person. My comments, although triggered by you, are based upon the general response to this topic, of misdirection, obfuscation and denigration. I am responding to a general theme here. I thought it was you who initially said that you would debate, but you find that you were in agreement. Therefore, why in the hell would you want to debate with me if you are in agreement? Your issue was with the concept of “winning”. Then you started pulling out the straw man about me ego tripping and having ulterior motives and all this other stuff. Why, when you said that you probably agreed with me?
I am not trying to persuade people to see it my way. I don’t have a way. Either something is true or somewhere in between to the other extreme of being false. I do belive that truth has more value than falsity and hence an argument can be measured as having more value than another. It’s not that complicated when predicated upon objective definitions and standards. Furthermore, why open the debate to everyone, as you advocate, if I am going to filter out the people I want to respond to anyway? You told me it was a silly idea to limit the debate to one person and now you are saying that I am free to only respond to the replies of my subjective choosing based upon whether I think they are crazy or whatever. That is contradictory. People would then only complain about me avoiding their counter points. Mathguy kept saying that I refused to answer one of his post....which he then used to call me "dishonest", when the truth is that so many people were responding that I had not even read his at that point. I am sure people, when they post, don’t see their post as crazy and they feel it worthy of a response. Case in point: This particular rebuttal from you I could have classified as crazy and without meriting a response. However, I am sure YOU thought that this was a lucid cogent response....lol. It mad sense to you....right?
Fine……you don’t like the premise and many posters don’t like this premise because it’s a subject that they don’t like because many people fear being exposed…..and nobody likes that.
Last edited by Indentured Servant; 04-26-2010 at 04:20 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one wants to be exposed.....hence....no takers....just obfuscation and misdirection.
