Challenge is what I am after but not too much of one. German I started learning because I like a lot of German philosophers and wanted to immerse myself into Hitler's Germany so I could hear things the way Germans did and understand them better. It also doesn't hurt that I find the people to match my own temperament.
Spanish I learned from working in a kitchen and from self study and I am getting back into it. I think I mistakenly perceived Spanish people as being intellectually bankrupt so I thought learning it would not open up new banks of knowledge but seeing javier milei and a dozen other Spanish people who are right wing as well has renewed my English.
I am attempting to sing a Norwegian song for round 2 so I only want to get the sounds down. Not learn the language
It's actually growing on me as i sit here listening more and more and enjoying the language. It has a certain rhythim. Its not like esperanto which lacks soul. I can almost feel the history as I listen to it and sense the spirit of it's people.
The spell the sound my like Meg which makes no sense. I can see an argument for mi but Meg is wrong. If I was dictator of Norway I would fix the language immediately. Day one. Gå and nå for example are now go and no and Meg is now Mai my or mi I will allow people to vote on which because I believe in freedom.
That wasn't bad tbh. You sounded like you were having fun. I am glad you are over there and not competing for women with me over here because I would love to that accent 9/10 times.
I am not going to compete against somebody who is above my level. Any opponent significantly better or worse than you kind of hurts your fun as either you stand no chance or they stand none.
"The Palestinian people possess the inalienable right to self-determination"
The right to aid determination is not only wrong but the people who use it are lying which is revealed when they oppose either white or black nationalism.
" you can basically be certain that anything God wants he will get, and so the world as it is now must be what he wants,"
I certainly have issues with the POE argument and responding the way most people do. I don't understand why God would get what he wants? I can have sex with my wife whenever I want and whereever I want whether she likes it or not, but I don't. She isn't physically strong enough to stop me, so I can just do it, and it's not a very easy crime to prosecute and worst case scenario I end up single which also works to improve my life. I just don't do it. I don't do what I want. So I guess that would be the first issue.
The second issue is assigning too much power to the word omnipotence. Omnipotence doesn't necessarily mean being able to do anything. Christians don't believe God can do anything and often point to verses in the bible showing he can't lie. Muslims believe that God is too weak to simultaneously make himself a man while also still running the universe. The etymology of the word omnipotent would suggest that it means not all powerful but most powerful and often the Caesars would get referred to as omnipotent .
I don't think I would use any other argument against the POE, because addressing gratuitous suffering is too much fun, and I also reject the omni-benevolent label given to God, but I would definitely push for a lower definition of omnipotent based on it's etymology, I would push an argument for freewill both of people and of supernatural entities such as angels and demons (demon just being a word for angel who turned against God) , an evil spirit could explain hurricanes, earthquakes etc. I would also point out that we don't know if an evil is gratuitous without a million year timeline or even a billion year, because apparently God is in every part of the timeline at once. You are correct that these aren't arguments your typical theist would use, but I see every debate as a thought experiment. I guess I got off track. There isn't anyone other than you I would want to debate on this because most people wouldn't be able to handle my arguments. I do appreciate the discussion though as it achieves the same results as the debate but in a more casual environment
I don't think this discussion is capable of going much further as we are approaching some agreement here (and you are already speaking above my head a bit) . I would say that there is more room for semantics on what terms like what omnipotent means and I personally would define it in a way most theists would disagree with.
ultimately the problem of evil is an argument meant to disqualify the existence of the tri-omni God. The burden of proof is on the person presenting the problem of evil as a way to disqualify the existence of that God. Gratuitous evil if true does disprove a tri-omni God. It overcomes free will arguments and if any example of gratuitous evil can be shown than it disproves the tri-omni God.
So this isn't the type of debate where you would look at which scenario is more plausible. Gratuitous evil is a more plausible explanation than some far off benefit but both sides of the debate have separate burdens. The person presenting has to prove that the problem of evil disqualifies God from being tri-omni. You do that by proving gratuitous evil exists. The one arguing against the triomni God just has to present plausible explanations for why seeming gratuitous evil is not gratuitous .
So if this was a debate on whether the triomni god exists than yes that more probable explanation for POE wins, but I see it as the person arguing the POE, is arguing it as a disqualifier for the triomni God.
1. Correct that it isn't going to come up for most theists though I lean gnostic and it's a familiar concept to gnostic though they are called hylics.
2. The separation between demon and angel would only be in whether said supernatural entity chooses to follow God as a slave or rebel.
3. So the butterfly effect is a little harder to conceptualize but essentially humanity would cause the holocaust but some gratuitous evil in the holocaust for example may prevent a deeper evil further down the line. It's more of a statement of not knowing whether a harm could be gratuitous or not unless we have as long if a timeliness to look at as God does.
I would say that you are correct. On a debate stage where you debate a Christian and his mission is to get converts than these arguments are unlikely to be seen. My interest personally is not to convince non converts but to present good arguments and these are what come to mind and ones I am mildly interested in seeing challenged in an opponent as competent as you. I will admit if I debated this live it would feel silly to stand on stage and defend the holocaust for example but I consider the POE and responses more of a thought experiment than actual attempts at being persuasive anyway
Nothing I want to go into depth into but gratuitous evil can be solved in a few ways. For example through philosophical zombies, or through pointing out that gratuitous suffering could be the result of supernatural forces, such as demons also being allowed free will. I don't want to spend time building that argument at the moment but would be curious as to how you would respond. Also if we point to things like suffering in the holocaust we could ask whether the butterfly effect and a 2 million year time frame means the holocaust caused less suffering than a world where everything is the same but that did not occur. Just arguments of this nature
I think the name of the resolution could be modified a bit as well. The current title I wouldn't be proud of winning because I would want to prove that the POE is not a disqualifier for the tri-omni God.
I might be willing to do this debate with you if you decide to repeat it. I don't think your opponent had very strong arguments here and I do think I could put up a better fight.
this is due easter morning. I forgot easter was sunday and having an 8 year old means holidays actually matter. I just made this a pain in the ass for myself by waiting until the last minute
I don't think you are. I think he was canadian and you appear to be canadian but you have the same arguments as Zmikecuber. I think his focus would be more spread than yours though. As far as what topics he debates, it would be less focused.
your arguments are technically less convincing but more concise which is where he should have moved. I don't want to embarrass myself so let me think for a second before I say the name.
Those arguments look familiar, particularly the future like ours argument which I stole from another debater myself. I am sure he didn't create the argument whole cloth and his style is a little different from yours but it would be by now anyway. Are you him?
this is true and so was british hegemony, and you can see it when the countries they were in were doing so well and then they left and became literal shitholes. This has got to be a non white thing, because if Blacks do a better job with my country and give me a better life than whites, the last thing I would do is start crying about my independence and kick them out to be lead by a bunch of incompetent whites.
As long as there is some fight against the rule to justify ignoring it. Also sometimes I ignore BOP claims if op doesn't bring it up within the debate but I normally agree with it. I don't usually report votes and if you provide justification consistent with your philosophy for ignoring the rule than I won't bitch
i was told i voted against rm twice. I only remember voting in this debate and the music one and i only voted against him in this one. tag me in the second debate i voted against him recently if anyone finds it.
I don't know that anyone needs to be punished, but sure. If we are going to have justice it needs to go both ways. My priority would be in developing ways to prevent child marriage and punishing people could be a part of that process but it wouldn't necessarily need to be.
Can you explain in detail why it is wrong for somebody to prevent children bring raped because they did something bad before. I am having a hard time understanding your argument
I don't necessarily hate them. I feel bad that their mind has been imprisoned.
However not having a flawless history is no excuse to allow evil to go unchecked. Nobody has a flawless history and by the same logic I shouldn't be able to prevent a rape I walked in on because the rapid would say "look whose talking buddy you have an imperfect history as well"
We have to hold people accountable and we don't lose our right to call out evil just because we have participated in it.
Do you really think I shouldn't call out something like how Islam itself promotes a hateful ideology just because some Christians are hateful?
I looked to see if any 2 words in the rap rhyme out of context and found none. I was looking for an excuse to be a smart ass and it didn't happen so great job pro
God can fix the damage right now. Just bow your head and recite this.
Jesus christ. I accept you as my Savior and promise to fight against those who would drive people away from you by doing evil in your name. Please bless my journey. Amen.
Then you reach out to a church and start preparing for baptism.
I think you know what songs need to be posted in this debate
I might have to forget this round
Challenge is what I am after but not too much of one. German I started learning because I like a lot of German philosophers and wanted to immerse myself into Hitler's Germany so I could hear things the way Germans did and understand them better. It also doesn't hurt that I find the people to match my own temperament.
Spanish I learned from working in a kitchen and from self study and I am getting back into it. I think I mistakenly perceived Spanish people as being intellectually bankrupt so I thought learning it would not open up new banks of knowledge but seeing javier milei and a dozen other Spanish people who are right wing as well has renewed my English.
I am attempting to sing a Norwegian song for round 2 so I only want to get the sounds down. Not learn the language
Burde almost sounds like it rhymes with murder. These sounds are new to me and more distinctive from German than I thought they would be.
It's actually growing on me as i sit here listening more and more and enjoying the language. It has a certain rhythim. Its not like esperanto which lacks soul. I can almost feel the history as I listen to it and sense the spirit of it's people.
The spell the sound my like Meg which makes no sense. I can see an argument for mi but Meg is wrong. If I was dictator of Norway I would fix the language immediately. Day one. Gå and nå for example are now go and no and Meg is now Mai my or mi I will allow people to vote on which because I believe in freedom.
This sound is hard to make for me. I don't know what to call it but it feels unintuitive
Nå or gå almost like a mix between an o and an a but leaning heavier on the o part if that explains it
I am actually putting a lot of effort into the next song. I feel like I may have lost round 1
jeg kommer til å ødelegge deg. hilsen fra amerika.
That wasn't bad tbh. You sounded like you were having fun. I am glad you are over there and not competing for women with me over here because I would love to that accent 9/10 times.
I will try to stand up straight in the next round and maybe do it when my wife is awake so I am not scared to use a strong singing voice
I am not going to compete against somebody who is above my level. Any opponent significantly better or worse than you kind of hurts your fun as either you stand no chance or they stand none.
I did that in one take, and with very little vocal training.
can you for the love of god contact me before opening these challenges up. Before your elo gets any lower I want a piece of you
part of me wants to apologize for not keping good track of this, but you aren't giving me good effort either
My proudest win
If I am losing by the time the voting period ends than I also want the debate removed
Barney would never ban me. He is my wife's boyfriend
my rebuttals are here https://youtu.be/EL3VX3K6Zq0?si=AjU-ClpttH9W7YoU
"I have conducted a lot of research "
Wrong, you went down increasingly more complex rabbit holes to justify your confirmation bias
This argument Is wrong
"The Palestinian people possess the inalienable right to self-determination"
The right to aid determination is not only wrong but the people who use it are lying which is revealed when they oppose either white or black nationalism.
Okay I understand now
" you can basically be certain that anything God wants he will get, and so the world as it is now must be what he wants,"
I certainly have issues with the POE argument and responding the way most people do. I don't understand why God would get what he wants? I can have sex with my wife whenever I want and whereever I want whether she likes it or not, but I don't. She isn't physically strong enough to stop me, so I can just do it, and it's not a very easy crime to prosecute and worst case scenario I end up single which also works to improve my life. I just don't do it. I don't do what I want. So I guess that would be the first issue.
The second issue is assigning too much power to the word omnipotence. Omnipotence doesn't necessarily mean being able to do anything. Christians don't believe God can do anything and often point to verses in the bible showing he can't lie. Muslims believe that God is too weak to simultaneously make himself a man while also still running the universe. The etymology of the word omnipotent would suggest that it means not all powerful but most powerful and often the Caesars would get referred to as omnipotent .
I don't think I would use any other argument against the POE, because addressing gratuitous suffering is too much fun, and I also reject the omni-benevolent label given to God, but I would definitely push for a lower definition of omnipotent based on it's etymology, I would push an argument for freewill both of people and of supernatural entities such as angels and demons (demon just being a word for angel who turned against God) , an evil spirit could explain hurricanes, earthquakes etc. I would also point out that we don't know if an evil is gratuitous without a million year timeline or even a billion year, because apparently God is in every part of the timeline at once. You are correct that these aren't arguments your typical theist would use, but I see every debate as a thought experiment. I guess I got off track. There isn't anyone other than you I would want to debate on this because most people wouldn't be able to handle my arguments. I do appreciate the discussion though as it achieves the same results as the debate but in a more casual environment
I don't think this discussion is capable of going much further as we are approaching some agreement here (and you are already speaking above my head a bit) . I would say that there is more room for semantics on what terms like what omnipotent means and I personally would define it in a way most theists would disagree with.
forgot to tag you bones, sorry.
ultimately the problem of evil is an argument meant to disqualify the existence of the tri-omni God. The burden of proof is on the person presenting the problem of evil as a way to disqualify the existence of that God. Gratuitous evil if true does disprove a tri-omni God. It overcomes free will arguments and if any example of gratuitous evil can be shown than it disproves the tri-omni God.
So this isn't the type of debate where you would look at which scenario is more plausible. Gratuitous evil is a more plausible explanation than some far off benefit but both sides of the debate have separate burdens. The person presenting has to prove that the problem of evil disqualifies God from being tri-omni. You do that by proving gratuitous evil exists. The one arguing against the triomni God just has to present plausible explanations for why seeming gratuitous evil is not gratuitous .
So if this was a debate on whether the triomni god exists than yes that more probable explanation for POE wins, but I see it as the person arguing the POE, is arguing it as a disqualifier for the triomni God.
This is a debate because as a society we have many people who disagree as to whether pimping is easy or not
1. Correct that it isn't going to come up for most theists though I lean gnostic and it's a familiar concept to gnostic though they are called hylics.
2. The separation between demon and angel would only be in whether said supernatural entity chooses to follow God as a slave or rebel.
3. So the butterfly effect is a little harder to conceptualize but essentially humanity would cause the holocaust but some gratuitous evil in the holocaust for example may prevent a deeper evil further down the line. It's more of a statement of not knowing whether a harm could be gratuitous or not unless we have as long if a timeliness to look at as God does.
I would say that you are correct. On a debate stage where you debate a Christian and his mission is to get converts than these arguments are unlikely to be seen. My interest personally is not to convince non converts but to present good arguments and these are what come to mind and ones I am mildly interested in seeing challenged in an opponent as competent as you. I will admit if I debated this live it would feel silly to stand on stage and defend the holocaust for example but I consider the POE and responses more of a thought experiment than actual attempts at being persuasive anyway
Nothing I want to go into depth into but gratuitous evil can be solved in a few ways. For example through philosophical zombies, or through pointing out that gratuitous suffering could be the result of supernatural forces, such as demons also being allowed free will. I don't want to spend time building that argument at the moment but would be curious as to how you would respond. Also if we point to things like suffering in the holocaust we could ask whether the butterfly effect and a 2 million year time frame means the holocaust caused less suffering than a world where everything is the same but that did not occur. Just arguments of this nature
I think the name of the resolution could be modified a bit as well. The current title I wouldn't be proud of winning because I would want to prove that the POE is not a disqualifier for the tri-omni God.
I might be willing to do this debate with you if you decide to repeat it. I don't think your opponent had very strong arguments here and I do think I could put up a better fight.
Pro is winning so far
this is due easter morning. I forgot easter was sunday and having an 8 year old means holidays actually matter. I just made this a pain in the ass for myself by waiting until the last minute
I don't think you are. I think he was canadian and you appear to be canadian but you have the same arguments as Zmikecuber. I think his focus would be more spread than yours though. As far as what topics he debates, it would be less focused.
your arguments are technically less convincing but more concise which is where he should have moved. I don't want to embarrass myself so let me think for a second before I say the name.
Those arguments look familiar, particularly the future like ours argument which I stole from another debater myself. I am sure he didn't create the argument whole cloth and his style is a little different from yours but it would be by now anyway. Are you him?
Here you go
Some people.make a rule "no kritiks" I just make a 200 character limit
this is true and so was british hegemony, and you can see it when the countries they were in were doing so well and then they left and became literal shitholes. This has got to be a non white thing, because if Blacks do a better job with my country and give me a better life than whites, the last thing I would do is start crying about my independence and kick them out to be lead by a bunch of incompetent whites.
As long as there is some fight against the rule to justify ignoring it. Also sometimes I ignore BOP claims if op doesn't bring it up within the debate but I normally agree with it. I don't usually report votes and if you provide justification consistent with your philosophy for ignoring the rule than I won't bitch
are you ready. That argument may be coming tonight.
I can't accept because I have been blocked bur
1. Desperado by the eagles
2. Billie Jean by Michael Jackson
3. What is a juggle by ICP
You don't get a more embarrassing list than that
I like that scoring style. I may have to steal it to judge these types of debates
Okay that last round I fucked up but it just happened to be your best round So i was losing it anyway
i was told i voted against rm twice. I only remember voting in this debate and the music one and i only voted against him in this one. tag me in the second debate i voted against him recently if anyone finds it.
I don't know that anyone needs to be punished, but sure. If we are going to have justice it needs to go both ways. My priority would be in developing ways to prevent child marriage and punishing people could be a part of that process but it wouldn't necessarily need to be.
Can you explain in detail why it is wrong for somebody to prevent children bring raped because they did something bad before. I am having a hard time understanding your argument
I don't necessarily hate them. I feel bad that their mind has been imprisoned.
However not having a flawless history is no excuse to allow evil to go unchecked. Nobody has a flawless history and by the same logic I shouldn't be able to prevent a rape I walked in on because the rapid would say "look whose talking buddy you have an imperfect history as well"
We have to hold people accountable and we don't lose our right to call out evil just because we have participated in it.
Do you really think I shouldn't call out something like how Islam itself promotes a hateful ideology just because some Christians are hateful?
I don't think it's bad to hate a religion that promotes harmful things like beheading, suicide bombings and fucking children.
I looked to see if any 2 words in the rap rhyme out of context and found none. I was looking for an excuse to be a smart ass and it didn't happen so great job pro
God can fix the damage right now. Just bow your head and recite this.
Jesus christ. I accept you as my Savior and promise to fight against those who would drive people away from you by doing evil in your name. Please bless my journey. Amen.
Then you reach out to a church and start preparing for baptism.