Total posts: 4,920
Posted in:
That sounds unhealthy. If its not meant matter of factly, it would be nice if you conveyed sincerely how you now understand it was wrong
You said I was being conned. Thinking is not a scapegoat for that claim so you can't behind that and on-top of that expect an apology.
Previous conversation implied that government could be utilized to certain aspirations, and that the far right is perceived as having little to know value, though that may or may not be translatable out of context.
Implying would be the word missing from your statements. Yes I do take the position far-right holds no value if I value truth and the government should helps its citizens and a "big government" can do that if you mean by big government public healthcare.
Created:
Posted in:
Sometimes it’s easy to confuse “great”with “formal”.
I do try to be "formal" but people just don't understand when they are wrong and I get really annoyed at that part.
IMO the greatest debate - in terms of arguments - on this site was from Death23:
Don't know too much about either so I'll check this out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
I would appreciate an apology.
I think you should d*e. What do you say about that?
I am not giving you an apology for an insult.
Okay, tell me what a value statement is.
The regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something.
So basically I value A but don't Value B as much and C not at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
Never made the claim. If the society deems the statues to be good then who am I to judge.So you are saying that anyone who believes that the statue's should stay up is in no way a fine person?
A, just that B must be destroyed without consulting the constituents of the town.
Yes that is bad.
Anyway, I think there were fine people on both sides.
If this is about the unite the right rally then. I think there are white-supremacists, illegitimate protesters and gullible people.
Created:
Posted in:
Far-Right is assumed to be a relative outlier. The rally was "based on far right ideas", therefore we can dismiss everyone in attendance as far right. There is established context surrounding a statue.
I asked this question which was not answered:
Where did I make a value statement on government or the far right?
Snoopy said:
Reread, in a more temperate tone I guess? I'm actually trying not to put words in your mouth.
You say I have been conned without showing evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
How did you get this? Where did I make a value statement on government or the far right?So all of the people protesting the government or whatever were wrong, and all of the people protesting the protesters were far right wing, and correct?
I think you should consider that you might have been conned.
I think you should consider when you don't know what you are talking about and put words into my mouth without asking for my actual position.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
The unite the right rally was based on far right ideas so if you mean "legitimate" protesters being people who don't associate with that then they were in the wrong protest and in this context would be illegitimate protesters since that rally was based on far-right ideas.is that if there really were legitimate protesters among the group portrayed as white nationalists, its essentially a violation of our commitment to free speech to associate them as unreasonable on a political basis.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph
It's a quantity. If you only have one choice, then your freedom of will is zero and then it can be higher or lower based on circumstance.
So some-people have more freedom than others?
So it would be safe to assume poor people lack the freedom to do well in life compared to a better off individual?
like your brain might control your activity, but that activity is controlled by particles and as far as we know, particles are not deterministic. So there's still room for choice in the matter.
Guess we have to wait for quantum mechanics to make advances to be sure on that part.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
No I agree with you. I was saying the definition would be "control over actions".I remain unconvinced that we actually have control over our actions in the way you seem to be implying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
I meant in the sense of making a choice to protest.
Yes because they would need to be protesting near what they are against in order for it to be a protest. Yes there are cases where people set up protest for ideas like feminism which has no real material place but with a statue people can protest near it.
Created:
Posted in:
What would be cases that freedom of will is not freedom of will?"freedom of will"
Do we make a choice because biology always makes us
I think everything can be traced to biology. I don't think there is a choice that is so useless that biology does not have a part to play in it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
I mean overall. I am sure you have already thought about this so who would you pick on everything you know? You at the end of saying who you would pick state a reason if you want.Overly Broad, and may take hours to answer
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
Are people who elect to protest?Are people who elect to protest a potential course of action considered as members of society?
Please to clear up what you mean there.
Created:
Posted in:
A is better than B, so B must be destroyed?
False if you read my argument. A is better than B so B can be destroyed since we have A.
Can is the main part you removed in place for will. That argument is copied from earlier. Simple Ctrl-f and type it in.
Which is what you are saying
A is book. B is monument. Thought that would be clear.
Even though, some people appreciate B?
People can appreciate all they want but A is still the better source of information. If this is based on appreciation why don't we allow serial killers appreciate what they do?
And some people despise B, but no one who is actually living today, lived during that time period.
Who cares about dead people? They are dead and the youth will be taking the place of the next in line to die. If they do not appreciate a monument then they can decide to remove it. I rather have the youth entering into adulthood be happy than people who are dead be happy since the dead can't be happy. This has restrictions but removing a statue is reasonable because the change is very little and the cost is small as well.
A span of 180 years is different than a span of 40 years,
Okay.
If people were still living and went through what they thought was a devastating time and they remembered it, I would be all for taking them down,
So you are against the demolition of specific homes? Since the people who did live in that home are dead and now people are now forced to keep that there since they are not alive to say demolish it.
but it lasted. Now it is in the past, and we need to remember, not destroy.
Remembering is not some thing only capable with monuments. It can occur with books and I argue to a much greater degree since it can record a lot more information. In another way a book can say more than a statue.
Created:
Posted in:
Don't think you should because like you said there are other debaters on the site.The reason why I am not being vainglorious about it is because I am trying to stay modest about it.
Your focusing solely on DART ratings.
Can you stop assuming what my positions are?
I combine DART ratings with DDO elo. I also take records into account.
Which is st*pid.
A debater is the best when he has beaten other likely contenders. This can be people who have a record of winning or at the very least show in the couple of debates they had that they are able to provide a good claim, evidence and explanation. I wouldn't know who is the best because I have yet to read a debate from blamonkey, bsh1. I have with RM but Ramshutu is better so I don't see why he isn't on there. Our Boat is Right is awful and a clear example was the source I gave before. He said CNN is Fake News for even if his claim, evidence and explanation is true is basically saying CNN reported badly with I think 4 stories even though the definition of Fake News required Our Boat is Right to show it was deliberate. He decided to bring in his own definition and he was still wrong. Ramshutu and orogami should be added to the list replaced by RM and Our Boat is Right. Don't know too much about blamonkey or bsh1 so they can stay.
Created:
Posted in:
I never said you did. I am saying your argument is A is good because it can lead to B. Monuments are good because it can lead what you want to do with your life.I did not say we should destroy books
If I said will earlier then I was wrong. It should be can lead to not will lead to.
but you are partly doing that too when you destroy the physical history of our country.
I am saying people are justified if they want to destroy monuments because as a society they deem it to be the correct thing to do.
Places of the Berlin Wall still stand, you know why? People want to see it.
Great for them.
There are many pictures and many books regarding it, why still have it?
More pictures more words than whatever a monument can ever do.
Because it is a major attraction, it is now a monument to remember History.
Great for them.
Kids can ask parents about it, schools can go see it, learn more about it and enjoy a nice field trip at the same time.
Great for them. Still anecdotes where I have given why books are better than monuments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
I think you are implying by his record being good it makes him a good debater. The problem is that you don't even agree with this
Despite my ranking, there are many on this site that I think are better then me like RM, blamonkey, Our Boat Is Right and Bsh1. There might be more but I just didn't list them.
Basically saying you don't think you are a good debater even though you are number 1. Do tell me if you implied something else.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
How about the control one has in doing actions. When science has better answers philosophy can think of a better definition.Part of the problem in these discussions is how difficult it is to define and indeed our extremely poor understanding of how our brains go about coming to conclusions and implementing behaviors.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
How would you define it?Will or perhaps agency.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
Even with this in mind. I will still hold these views in the future. Reason is because I have a standard which is required for me to change my mind. It require a good enough claim, evidence and explanation in order for me to change my mind. Since I have enough knowledge I can safely say I would never be a right-winger.You are just young, like many of the people that have your beliefs, who grew up with internet access their whole lives.
Just seeing pictures, and reading books, don't do them justice.
Problem is that it does them even more justice. A book can tell information that a monument can't. The monument is restricted to a statue and they have less words that can be used on the statue. With a book it can give so much more information because it can say more.
It can go either way on statues and monuments, you can read a book, or see a picture of a monument, then want to go see it in person... or you can see it in person, then want to go read about it. I don't know why you are arguing that fact with me.
My argument is that A is better than B so B can be destroyed because we have A. Books are more important than monuments so I don't care about them.
it just makes more of an impact seeing a huge statue in person than taking a picture and tearing it down. This is opinion and not really something that can be debated. You have given no supporting evidence that monuments do not create interest, because there isn't any. It is an opinion.
Anecdotes given by you while I don't really need evidence to say books have more words which means it can say more. I don't really need evidence for such a thing but if you want evidence that a book can say more than a statue then do tell me because that would be such an easy point for me to provide. I am arguing for facts not anecdotes.
We disagree on the importance of historical monuments, it is as simple as that.
I care more about something that provides more than something that provides less. A book provides more than a statue.
Age is probably one of the reasons we disagree.
I have 2. 1) You are incapable of knowing when you are wrong. 2) Things have worked out for you and confirming biases comes natural to you. Due to this you are unable to see my side without emotion or see it as an attack instead of what it actually is which is a better stance than yours.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Can you put me in the reciever?
Christianity gives me no reason to fear it as does Islam.
Well it should.
Here is evidence that harassment of Religious groups has increased with Christians, Jews and Muslims. My claim is that Christians are doing their part in that as well. Would you claim it is the fault of Islam?
List of Islamic attacks around the world commited by muslims
I would also like to add this which states right wing terror is on the rise
This is more of a problem than Islamic terror.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
@Wrick-It-Ralph
What should it be called?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Our Boat Is Right
You are better than him. He is bad and if you don't think so here is a debate to show you how bad he is. Everyone else I agree with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
If it's not language/culture, then what else is it?
Language and culture is not the same thing. Language is apart of culture. I would say it is based on political reasons but then that can be reduced to cultural reasons. You have yet to find an example of language being primarily the reason of separation. Do come back to me with evidence.
It's up to you to provide an alternative source of independence desire and then I'll see if it works or not.
I don't understand this. Are you pushing the burden to me when you are unable to fulfil your side of the burden? If it isn't that then this comment is a non-sequitur for your claim language being the reason for separation or the start of it.
You cited that Catalans wanted to vote, however, Spain is a democracy, otherwise they would not be allowed to be in the EU.
The Catalans wanted independence which was being stopped by Spain. If democracy was actually the rule there the government in charge should not be allowed to stop a vote taking place.
Despite the Spanish court also banning the non-binding vote, the Catalan self-determination referendum went ahead on 9 November 2014.
They weren't able to use the democracy to vote for something they wanted.
Catalans can in other words, already vote.
Not true.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
Oh come on. Is this what you have resorted to when you can't actually rebut my claims? Petty insults? It is real shame that I dedicated time to telling you how wrong you are only for you to throw it in my face without learning from your mistakes.i can tell by your arguments, statements, grammar, examples, beliefs, and the way that you write, that you have not achieved maturity yet.
You don't understand what I am talking about,
I understood it so much that I reduced it to as little words as possible and compared it to mine and realised it was not a very good argument. You filled your arguments with anecdotes that didn't improve your point instead made me realise how bad you are at making arguments. I would expect a person who is on a debating site would realise how to make a good argument but reading your arguments and other countless examples of other people's arguments I have been proven wrong.
and won't understand until you have gained more experience, maturity, and understanding of reality.
You don't understand reality when you can't even understand this "Yes my argument is that A is better than B so B can be destroyed since we have A." is better than your argument which is A is good because it leads to B.
We can have this conversation again when you have reached at least 35 years of age, when you have finished school, found a career, bought a house, and support a family. At that point we will be on the same page, and we can continue.
It would be a waste of my time. I am sure you are older than me and the probability of your mind being changed is unlikely so it is best we don't speak when I am older. You don't understand how to make a good argument so I don't expect you to understand at an even older age when you have done well I am assuming so far.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph
Saying nothing is self-defeating because to say you did nothing means that you did something.nothing really.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
Yes and I doubt most people are not capable of that.Looking at the cover of a book requires you to go to a library and see it.
A monument is out for everyone to see, even if you are not looking for it, you drive past it and it can build interest unexpectedly, then you go searching for a good book.
This implies so much. For one is states that statues is the first reason why someone has an interest in something and then states it gives a person so much of an impact that it tells them to go to a library.
And I don't think the internet is a good option either, anyone can write whatever they want on the internet, but a book needs to get published.
This doesn't make any sense. A book can be as wrong as an internet web address. One example I find which a book is awful but still went through publishing is Explaining Post-Modernism. That has so many flaws and still went through publishing because the writer Stephen Hicks owned the publishing company. You are arguing against false information not the internet. Both books and the internet have false information doesn't mean that platform breeds false information. Down below is a guy stating the errors.
The chances that the book is more accurate than anything on the internet is greater.
I can say it isn't and we won't be going anywhere. Do bring evidence to support your side.
It may not be the best example because it is named after her for doing good, but it was still provocative, just like the monuments and statues are.
So basically you are for aesthetically pleasing items that can be a reason to do something with your life. Problem here is that statues are not the main reason or a prevalent reason why someone does something. Reason is the internet is more prevalent and things like YouTube can get people into doing something that they like by watching a YouTube video about it. YouTube requires an internet connection and can be accessed anywhere with the internet connection whereas a statue is at one place. Even the statue is not important because you can simply take a picture and upload it to Instagram and then demolish it. There are better ways of seeing aesthetically pleasing things that give you motivation into doing something. YouTube and Instagram are two examples.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph
What are you trying to say with that?\m/ (0.0) \m/
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
Yes my argument is that A is better than B so B can be destroyed since we have A.Your argument is books exist, therefore we should get rid of statues and monuments. It's the same thing you are accusing me of.
I will read the argument written by linate in another post. I'm done trying to convince you that monuments build interest for young people in history.
Don't know what you mean by linate but you couldn't convince me because your position is not as good as mine. Books are better than statues which is why they are expendable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph
That would be true.but rather they don't understand what it is they're advocating for.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
RM Really should priories quality over quantity so that people who are less capable in debating than you like Alec don't take your spot.
I am not hailing to a worse debater.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
So do you support Trump?That, I can relate to. Thanks for the laugh
How about Hillary vs Trump?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
At least we agree that they were "stupid comments". It is not out of context when they show what happened before and after when he said that ridiculous line. I don't want to through and waste my time with an entire Donald Trump speech. That very speech I was listening for 1 minutes and found 4 errors in what he was saying.And many of the stupid comments were/are taken out of context just like the example we are talking about.
Either way, monuments do insight interest, that is one reason they are there, books are here to back up that interest. I'm not going to argue that point further, it is just common sense, which the country (and the world) seems to be losing a lot of these days.
If it was common sense you would be able to explain your stance but you can't. You argument is I like statues therefore keep them. My argument is that books are the second best source of information whether it be through words and pictures. Only rivalled by the internet. It has an added bonus to work while the internet connection doesn't if the book is read online.
I didn't have to look it up to know that it is ridiculous to think our president would say that, that is the difference between the real world and believing an opinion news anchor who gets paid to try and persuade you one way or another. Then they pick on each other for spreading falsehoods, I don't have time for that BS.
It wasn't "BS". I watched a snippet showed by a "news anchor" not them speaking about the ordeal.
C'mon man, think.
No you should think because you don't understand how bad your argument is for defending statues and still don't realise some comments you made where non-sequiturs and 1 was a slippery slope fallacy that you defended. If you actually thought about your stance you wouldn't be making these mistakes.
This happens just as much on Fox News and other media outlets you mentioned, just on the other spectrum. When a senator, or someone in high office is claimed to say something ridiculous, it is usually not true, or completely taken out of context.
In this context they showed exact footage of him saying it. So Trump did say something "ridiculous".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Harikrish
War from what I understand was done for power. In the present power can be gained through money. The US knows that which is why they are doing well in making other countries "democratic" when they are actually exploiting their natural resources. Might be due to Religious grounds like what I think Israel is but I think in the present that is the exception rather then the rule.Last time around they put away 6 million circumcised pricks. Don't underestimate their hate for all things circumcised.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@K_Michael
Owl because you took raven so I wanted to pick something someone else hasn't.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
Yeah, I'm asking if you've seen or heard them before
I am thinking Trump must have said it but all his st*pid comments are blocking my memory from his reasonable ones.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Harikrish
I doubt it would happen again and I don't have the influence to make that happen.Europe had 2 world wars. They must hate each other very much. Don't encourage them to start another world war.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
“You had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists,”
I copied this in ctrl-f and there was nothing in post 39 about it. This quote is not from post 39 check for yourself.
Created:
Posted in:
I used ctrl-f to find where I said that here but I didn't.Edited
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I would say he is misinformed. The problem is that he puts more emphasis on "assimilation" then an individual being a legal citizen or not. The problem is that is what determines "assimilation" not his condition which is speak the same language.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
Post 221?I was curious after reading post 221, as to the significance.
I don't know where you got that from. Do you have a link to it?
Your comment is post 42 so it must be from another forum post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
“You had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists,”Have you ever observed these words in your life?
Why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
When you don't like the guy who is in charge, you vote someone who you like to be in charge. Why didn't they like him?
>>The new parliament adopted the Catalan Sovereignty Declaration in early 2013, asserting that the Catalan people had the right to decide their own political future. ... Despite the Spanish court also banning the non-binding vote, the Catalan self-determination referendum went ahead on 9 November 2014.
I am guessing it is because they are not allowed freedom to do what they want.
The separatist movement is at least partly due to culture.
Language is a higher reason or is there something else that is a bigger reason?
The region that is more hispaniphone, Tabarnia has less separatist support. I wonder why.
The evidence was 1 video of 1 protest. Can you please give me a poll or non-anecdotal evidence?
Created:
-->
@Alec
1:Austria Hungary
Based on political reasons.
>>From 1867 onwards, common expenditures were allocated 70% to Austria and 30% to Hungary. This split had to be negotiated every decade. By 1907, the Hungarian share had risen to 36.4%. The negotiations in 1917 ended with the dissolution of the Dual Monarchy.
From what I can gather most of the other one's from what I know are due to political reasons. I will allow you to pick one that was primarily caused by having multiple languages.
Broken up in this context means that your country loses some land to a new country or to a existing foreign country.
Split would be a better word.
If your already assimilated, what's the point of you being in the country for 3-5 years.
This word you use assimilation is not important. It matters if they are a legal citizen or not. For you to deny that and say assimilation is more important really does tell how little you have done research on this topic. I would like to know a country that split primarily based on having multiple languages.
You can make that argument about any loan someone takes out. They'll pay it off with interest eventually at a previously agreed upon minimum rate or they will suffer the consequences of not paying back a loan. It's for them and their creditor to figure out. It's good for the economy.
So it doesn't matter there is wage stagnation on only the higher earners are receiving wage growth. It only matters if you have a good economy? Okay.
The graph is Wage increases in the US rise to the top earners.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
No answer or do you actually think showing me a bombing done by one person is enough?
If that is the case then you are irrational.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Claim to their own governance because they didn't like the one's who were in charge. It is more complicated than language. To bog it down to that is reductionist and leaves out much more important reasons like governance.What else could the true cause be?
Do you feel like Brexit occurred because of the language difference between other EU countries?
Catalonia has been stating that they have their own unique culture and that is worthy of separatism however if they didn't have a unique culture, then they wouldn't want to break away.
Culture is more than just language. Sure that can be apart of it but there is more to it.
Thanks for not calling me racist. It's good to have an open mind.
I still think you are wrong because you are misinformed which doesn't rebut what you said here but I just wanted to add more context.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DBlaze
You are arguing from personal experience which is a bad way to argue since you are not the only person who went through what you did and all I have to show is an anecdote to show an example of my way working.I'm relating this with what happened to me. I am not arguing anything....
I am just saying that some people don't want the statues to be removed because they think it will diminish the importance of, and the interest in,.... history. I agree with that, you don't have to. But that does not make either of us an evil person.
If all this is a thought then I would this a bad point. In order for it to be a good point it would require a claim supported by an explanation and evidence. This only has a claim. It won't diminish history because like I said history stays whether you destroy the statue or not. So basically that argument for keeping the statue is a non-sequitur. Here is what a non-sequitur is:
So some of the people that were there protesting the removal of a stature were not at all white supremacists, neo nazi, or racist, as many people believe because of the media.
Why are you even talking about this? I didn't bring it up.
Trump was referring to these people when he said, "there are fine people on both sides."
To say this disregards why the actual rally took it place. The rally is based on far-right ideas. If you don't understand how st*pid this statement is then remove the context of the rally and put in Germans that took part in concentration camps. Now insert in "there are fine people on both sides". No that is not true. The very idea of racism is not bound by any science has lead to the deaths of many. The very idea of Trump saying that in a far-right rally diminishes what actually occurred which was a group effort at protesting far-right ideas.
You have to be pretty dense to believe that Trump said White supremacists are fine people.
You are actually are dense if you don't understand that Trump said there are good people at a far-right rally. You stated what he said before which was "there are fine people on both sides" which means he said there are good in a far-right rally. Trump made no mention of it being some or most people so a white nationalist's can see that and say Trump agrees with our message but a reasonable person would say it would be the people who didn't understand what the rally was about. This foresight that was lacking by Trump made this an awful statement. By not knowing how people who agree with the message would see that comment he has pretty much gave white nationalist a confirmation pretty much saying yeah you guys are fine people.
But, many do because they have been trained to trust the falsehoods of the media.
Stop parroting from Trump and learn to understand what you are actually saying. The media is such a general that encompasses everything. By you saying that you are pretty much saying don't trust media. If so how did you get this information and accept it when you don't even trust the media? Or maybe your actual stance is don't trust the falsehoods of the left but trust the "truth" of Fox News, Breitbart and Infowars.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Are you telling me this entire conflict was based around language?Spain didn't assimilate Catalonia and now, Catalonia wants to break away to form their own country. If Catalonia were more culturally similar to Spain, they would be less likely to break away from Spain, therefore keeping the country more united.
Created: