Total posts: 352
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Oho. I found a fantastically beautiful argument from Plato that gives very reasonable grounding for God's existence. I'm not 100% convinced, but it looks better than KCA or Ontological Argument.
- Consider some beautiful thing — say an incredibly beautiful sunset, the kind that totally absorbs you in a profound sense of beauty, awe, and wonder..
- Now, instead of pausing in that experience alone — which is our usual tendency — elevate your thoughts still higher and consider that this is not the only beautiful thing. There are many other experiences equally or more beautiful as this one.
- Then consider that there must be something in common amongst all these experiences — in exactly the same way that there is something in common for all triangles, all horses, or all trees. That is, each of these things has some defining principle or principles, some essence.
- Consider further that a defining essence has, at least in theory, some existence outside of its instantiation in actual examples. Hence we may conceive of the abstract “Form” of a triangle, which would exist even if somehow we were able to remove all physical triangles from the world. If so, we may also suppose that there is some Form of Beauty, which is the principle that all beautiful things have in common; and that this may potentially exist independently of all beautiful things.
- Moreover, Beauty is not the only good. There are also such noble things as Truth, Virtue, Excellence, and Justice — which we also unhesitatingly consider good, which delight or assure us, and which can bring us very deep levels of satisfaction.
- And, just as with Beauty, we may suppose that there is some essence or Form for each of these other things: a Form of Truth, a Form of Virtue, of Excellence, of Justice, and so on.
- And finally, we may contemplate the possibility of some principle or essence which all these different Forms of good things have in common. This, too, would be a Form — the Form of Goodness.
- God is defined as that being than which nothing can be more Good. Therefore God is the Form of Goodness.
- Darwinism cannot alone explain this, due to heroic sacrifice contradicting the ideals of survival, but can still be viewed as beautiful
Created:
Posted in:
I'm confused by why we have the feature, since there seemed to be no real basis for it. (Juggle just seemed to design it arbitrarily). Thett3 made a pretty convincing case why it's not a great idea (https://www.debate.org/debates/DDO-should-keep-a-voting-system-with-multiple-categories/1/votes/2/). Granted, Judging is more high quality on DART, but it's hard to say 100% that no one can abuse it. Especially since I can just easily award conduct if one side doesn't insult and the other accidentally forfeits one round. Even Ragnar is not infallible and in Oromagi's debate gave sources to Oromagi because of one uncited source from Athias. What's the reasoning?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
congrats you are now the most active user, how do you feel
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
on a moral basis, do you support people pressing the button that revives their singular most loved one?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
right. Keep asking more questions if that’s your style. Make sure opponent has backing, and is relevant. If they say something you can’t understand ask them to clarify the idea. I get that Oromagi style is very hard to read as a foreigner. Take apart each sentence if you have to. Try to really understand what he’s saying. Knowing his claims is important so to back yourself up
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
this Guy is probably trolling. Notice my massive strawman and how he didn’t even read that I partially accepted his ultimate truth in order to sneakily move the goalpost
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Of course, it’s obvious, God is the ultimate truth, it's self-evident, why doubt it? But it is precisely because it is the supreme God above all, that I must think about it. How do I best give to god? How can I accept my sins? How do we best unite as one to prove our changed minds? None of these questions have been answered, only given the simplest pure idea: God is the ultimate truth.
It's times like this when I think, perhaps it isn't the blessing the God,but rather, the problem that faith presents to me. So today, are we here to discuss whether god exists? No, this concerns if you are willing to believe in yourself and your people instead.
What philosophy does God present? I've been on this planet for quite some time, I've seen some come, I've seen some go. Some people were forced to go, they respect the rules. Some go by their own volition, they respect their decision. Some want to challenge the world. On top of that mountain of ambition may be the "best model" trophy. Some people want to go on a vacation, their journey is called the space and the ocean. Some people already left this planet, but are still in another universe. Some people are here physically, some people are here in your heart.
Because, the truth is already here. Everyday, every year, I listen to the people praying, saying God is all, God is the ultimate truth. I say, maybe, but I believe more in myself and my people. Because my loved ones told me, they lived a whole life of warmth, and the only thing they can't give up is love, unity, and freedom. You think God is with here with you, but you ignore the accomplishments we personally hold. Those important values are already here as the ultimate truth.
One Piece's Hiluruk used his life goal to create in his mind representation of memories, ultimate truths to him. He let the falling of pink snow occur, and everyone beside him laughed at his stupidity, insanity, dumbness, but he succeeded. He let the entire world see his powerful message.
Before dying, he said: "You will not die to bullets penetrating your chest. You will not die to an incurable disease. Only being forgotten, is the true death." Those that you truly loved, and left, those men and women who lived on this planet, will never die, because they lived in your heart, as your own pink snow, falling still. This is the ultimate truth, the power of the people.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
you keep failing to directly address ideas. Why is that?
For example, Oromagi said that if people change meaning of words, the context gets out of hand and language stops making sense. If his argument is confusing, try repeating back your understanding. You can also make your argument apply to more ideas. For example, you could say that even if we cannot determine language randomly, the culture works together to form meaning of language. Because lexicographers are the standard who listens to people. So whoever said gay means homosexual gradually changed it to the social standard. That’s a better reason why Oromagi may be a walking talking dictionary
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Of course, it’s obvious, God is the ultimate truth, it's self-evident, why doubt it? But it is precisely because it is the supreme God above all, that I must think about it. There are many problems that I encounter. Why are we suffering every day? Why does God not reveal himself to us? And if God is real, why would we have to pray to him to gain something in return? None of these questions have been answered, only given the simplest pure idea: God is the ultimate truth. It's times like this when I think, perhaps it isn't the blessing the God, but rather, the problem that evil presents to me. So today, are we here to discuss whether god exists? No, this concerns if you are willing to believe in yourself and your people instead.
What philosophy does God present? I've been on this planet for quite some time, I've seen some come, I've seen some go. Some people were forced to go, they respect the rules. Some go by their own volition, they respect their decision. Some want to challenge the world. On top of that mountain of ambition may be the "best model" trophy. Some people want to go on a vacation, their journey is called the space and the ocean. Some people already left this planet, but are still in another universe. Some people are here physically, some people are here in your heart. Because, the truth is already here. Everyday, every year, I listen to the people praying, saying God is all, God is the ultimate truth. I say no thank you, I believe in myself and my people. Because my loved ones told me, they lived a whole life of warmth, and the only thing they can't give up is love, unity, and freedom. You think God is with here with you, but you ignore the accomplishments we hold. Those important values are already here as the ultimate truth, so the persons that work together with you, becomes the ultimate truth.
One Piece's Hiluruk used his life goal to create in his mind representation of memories, ultimate truths to him. This was displayed by pink snow, and everyone beside him laughed at his stupidity, insanity, dumbness, but he succeeded. He let the entire world see his powerful message. Before dying, he said: "You will not die to bullets penetrating your chest. You will not die to an incurable disease. Only being forgotten, is the true death." Those that you truly loved, and left, those men and women who lived on this planet, will never die, because they lived in your heart, as your own pink snow, falling still. This is the ultimate truth, the power of the people.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
why Do you fail to connect your arguments together?
Why do you not use sources?
Why do you not have structure in your writing?
Why do you not use sources?
Why do you not have structure in your writing?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
42. It’s always the answer
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
it seems logic won't work on you. Let's see if emotion works. I am literally going to plagiarize another guy because I love his argument lol
At first it seems simple, God is the ultimate truth, it's self-evident, why doubt it? But it is precisely because it is the supreme God above all, that I must think about it. There are many problems that I encounter. Why are we suffering every day? Why does God not reveal himself to us? And if God is real, why would we have to pray to him to gain something in return? None of these questions have been answered, only given the simplest pure idea: God is the ultimate truth. It's times like this when I think, perhaps it isn't the blessing the God, but rather, the problem that evil presents to me. So today, are we here to discuss whether god exists? No, this concerns if you are willing to believe in yourself and your people instead.
What philosophy does God present? I've been on this planet for quite some time, I've seen some come, I've seen some go. Some people were forced to go, they respect the rules. Some go by their own volition, they respect their decision. Some want to challenge the world. On top of that mountain of ambition may be the "best model" trophy. Some people want to go on a vacation, their journey is called the space and the ocean. Some people already left this planet, but are still in another universe. Some people are here physically, some people are here in your heart. Because, the truth is already here. Everyday, every year, I listen to the people praying, saying God is all, God is the ultimate truth. I say no thank you, I believe in myself and my people. Because my loved ones told me, they lived a whole life of warmth, and the only thing they can't give up is love, unity, and freedom. You think God is with here with you, but you ignore the accomplishments we hold. Those important values are already here as the ultimate truth, so the persons that work together with you, becomes the ultimate truth.
One Piece's Hiluruk used his life goal to create in his mind representation of memories, ultimate truths to him. This was displayed by pink snow, and everyone beside him laughed at his stupidity, insanity, dumbness, but he succeeded. He let the entire world see his powerful message. Before dying, he said: "You will not die to bullets penetrating your chest. You will not die to an incurable disease. Only being forgotten, is the true death." Those that you truly loved, and left, those men and women who lived on this planet, will never die, because they lived in your heart, as your own pink snow, falling still. This is the ultimate truth, the power of the people.
Created:
Posted in:
my partner found a good job, should I abandon everything and go with them?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ImminentDownfall
cool. which debate topics are you best at?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
No, I'm actually on the side where gun control is useless (in the US) LOL
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
anyways. What do you think of Mall? A misguided foreigner, or something else?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
well, you know I specialize in computer science, mathematics, anti-smoking, and anti gun control in the US. However, I rarely debate any of these because AI dwindles down to a philosophy question rather than science. And also my anti gun control essay is heavily cherry picked and could probably easily be destroyed by someone like oromagi.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
oh, that's dang spot on lol. Yeah, I don't really care about what kind of topic so long as a topic is mentioned
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
what can you cold read about myself? You have my debates, my deviant art (https://www.deviantart.com/sel-diora), my song review blog (https://favesongs.wordpress.com/), and a song composed by yours truly (https://www.noteflight.com/scores/view/eb80eb020b2e43e7c85bdfe84d85900e701b8f5a), not to mention my dream journal (http://www.dreamjournal.net/journal/user/9spaceking). Go crazy.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
i guess he also took the risk that my anti abortion argument could be as strong as my anti smoking and gun control ideas. He definitely thought things through and if I was MisterChris I still might’ve lost because of his slavery comparison
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
yeah. If ayyantu gets through DD
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
nice. Also random question do you do lucid dreaming? (Since you’re into psychology)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
speaking off open border policy, what’s your stance on it for US (ignoring coronavirus)?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
probably yeah, unless Ayyantu tricks you into accepting something like open border policy lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
actually yeah I think you could replace whiteflame as final boss since whiteflame is busy (unless he changes his mind). We’ll see how far ayyantu gets.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
As RM is quitting, I need a potential replacement of intelligence is beaten. Are you willing to be the guard (and then only Oromagi will vote) instead? Or I could wait to see if intel is beaten I guess
Edit: never mind we got
Whiteflame
Intel
DD
Sum1
Me
As full tower. Though if whiiteflames busy u can be final boss
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
also you contradicted yourself because you said even a person without feeling or motivation can still have right, merely due to personhood. This proves that being human is all it takes to get human rights https://www.debateart.com/debates/2587-a-person-without-feelings-or-motivations-cannot-have-rights
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I see your issue. I've read through a paper about morality, and it notes the philosophies combine together. They form "a mixture of rules, attitudes, behaviours and evaluations which tendtowards universality, but do not demand it" , so does not have absolute dominance over the theory of right and wrong (https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/41174293.pdf). So now the question is, does the objective morality stance require an objective agent which to enact the universal human rights, which have been founded as essential for society? I'm not 100% sure myself. I'll try to figure it out.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
the reasoning behind Roy's argument is that there is no demonstration necessary, because Declaration of Independence says it is "self evident" (ex. you do not need to demonstrate 1=1, or 60 seconds are one minute, and other objective truths). You'd have to prove otherwise to destroy the fundamental rights of humanity.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Roy's argument enhances that idea by saying, humans need to exist to have human objective moral ideals. We are merely here to observe our own transcendental moral objectives. For example, Praying mantis eat their own kind after mating, making cannibalism objectively permissible within the realm of mantis objective morality. On the other hand, we have consistently valued ourselves and our own society with no exception, observing the human universal objective morality. You might be confusing "objective moral system" which does not exist, with objective right and wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
unfortunate you had to go. I think David downright isn’t even here to apologize and Ragnar might still be stuck in his “can’t be defeated” Debate mindset. You could debate him over it but I think he already has the ending in his mind and you probably couldn’t beat him unless you channeled Roy. Plus he reduced it below one month which was more logical than 40 days
Created:
Posted in:
based on his conversational style and his inability to understand oromagi’s complex sentences I think he’s just a foreigner with gap in English skills. He thinks debating is likely just exchange of controversial ideas so he picks the most insane topics to guarantee someone will answer. But he mistakes then for I can I BB type topics where sources are not necessary to prove your point and mere logic triumphs. So that’s why he uses zero sources, definitions and his research is slim to none. He also can’t seem to connect ideas very well which explains why he doesn’t think we proved anything, as well as why my emotional based argument failed to convince him (“we the people As one” idea works on Americans)
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
the debaters widely considered the best can debate anyone, any time. Ben Shapiro doesn't back down when he's faced against someone like Jordan Peterson. We've seen him lose, but that makes all his fast talk and wins that much more impressive.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
yeah, but if he is actually forced into an extremely difficult debate we don't know if he will actually be victorious. Ragnar's own victories are so hollow that they are basically cherry picking mediocre people who never have a chance. Roy on the other hand has consistently defeated really, really skilled debaters.
For example 16kadams whose elo is above 5k couldn't win against Roy [https://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-The-United-States-Should-Adopt-an-Open-Border-Policy/1/],
Conservative politico with 4k elo failed to win (https://www.debate.org/debates/The-US-is-justified-in-preempting-the-spread-of-nuclear-arms./1/),
he almost tied with Raisor with 4 point difference (https://www.debate.org/debates/The-Americans-with-Disabilities-Act-should-be-repealed/1/),
did very closely with TUF (https://www.debate.org/debates/Anime-studies-should-be-offered-in-American-high-schools/2/),
defeated Danielle (https://www.debate.org/debates/Philosophy-and-the-humanities-are-underrated-in-education./1/), and again [https://www.debate.org/debates/Rush-Limbaugh-was-slandered-by-racist-charges./1/, and again (https://www.debate.org/debates/Nationalizing-health-care-in-the-U.S.-would-increase-its-cost/1/)
beaten Larz the Beast slayer (who I remind you, beat Whiteflame two times) [https://www.debate.org/debates/Governments-should-value-economic-equality-before-prosperity/2/], and did it again [https://www.debate.org/debates/People-should-have-the-right-to-make-dangerous-choices./1/], and again [https://www.debate.org/debates/That-it-should-be-a-criminal-offence-for-a-politician-to-lie/1/]
defeated Fourtrouble two [https://www.debate.org/debates/The-United-States-should-have-a-general-policy-of-free-trade./1/] times [https://www.debate.org/debates/Affirmative-Action/15/]
Can we say for certain that Ragnar could defeat the Beast Slayer three times? We don't know. His analysis seems nowhere as strong as Whiteflame, especially as he struggled in the Jeff vs Oromagi debate. We don't know he could battle Raisor and do well, nor stand among the ranks of Danielle, Four Trouble, or even 16kadams. We haven't seen his true potential and he definitively choses to avoid extremely skilled debaters, even on DART there's blamonkey, Jeff, Oromagi and Whiteflame who are very dangerous. He hasn't even debated MisterChris on his strong belief of abortion, where Chris is arguably the best anti-abortion debater (unless Whiteflame got something). Even if he is actually better than Oromagi still, he refuses to even take the risk to lose, so he is a worse debater, because he does not want to take the risk of losing. you grow more in a failure than a success.
Created:
Despite Ragnar's claims that he went toe-to-toe against Roy, it's difficult to say for certain precisely how strong of a debater Ragnar actually is, since he has never been remotely challenged (unlike Oromagi, who at least went against Jeff from the top 20).
Judging from his abortion debate against PGA (the only truly competent person who debated him on DART), it's difficult to say for sure. He kept continuing using the idea of "collection of cells", which surely would've fallen under a more competent debater like MisterChris. His comparison to slavery was hard for me to tear down, but I knew it was flawed, and Chris notes that the women's own choice makes it difficult to sustain (not to mention I could only find one research that said 92% of abortions are unintended pregnancies). Pro also didn't use the uncertainty principle, which was Chris's nail in the coffin that defeated me. I don't know if Ragnar would've been able to link the legality impact, as Ragnar's analysis of specific laws and politics are uncertain (unless he's actually on Roy's level). As for my personal loss, it's well known that I am pretty much way below average when playing devil's advocate for the most part.
Going through his DDO debates though, it's definitive that he's probably at least above average level, if not on Oromagi or Whiteflame's current level. He managed to defeat an above average user about sociology. And while Oromagi was still in his unstructured version, some one random voter was convinced that Ragnar won about self-driving cars (though to be fair, Oromagi was fighting an uphill battle). The closest Ragnar was to being beaten was in a Star Trek debate, where bladerunner voted in his opponent's favor (though Maikuru has not been defeated either, and voted for Ragnar). He definitely has improved since, but due to lack of debating against serious opponents, it's difficult to say if Ragnar is truly on Roy Latham's level. I heavily doubt he would win big issues, such as gun control, death penalty, etc. How good do you guys think Ragnar actually is?
Created:
Q1: If morality is objective, then we can expect virtually universal use of a standard set of moral principles, for example, concerning life, liberty, and happiness.
Q2: In the case of humans, it is because what our species believes its transcendental set of moral principles are (derived from "nature of man").
Despite different views, all of them concern similar ideas (freedom, love, universal rights, etc.).
Q3: All humans use and appeal to this standard, if only subconsciously, shown within disputes that are comparable to a universal standard.
Q4: The reasoning behind this, is that humans are genetically disposed to protect one self, their family, and their cultures. The weighing of survival and suffering among different cultures, is seen throughout human history, which proves the basic ideals being backed by entirety of humanity.
Q5: If no such standard existed, discussions would be pointless as any point of view may be dismissed immediately.
C1: Morality is objective.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
His big speech went something like this:
At first it seems obvious, revive your loved one, why not do it, it's in our prime nature. But since this is my most loved one, I must think carefully about it. There are many questionable ideas. Does an old and sick person come back young and healthy? Does a criminal come back rehabilitated? All these questions have not been answered, only the most ideal has been presented, "your loved one". When faced with a situation like this one, I feel like the problems we missed, is not god's blessing, but rather the question of evil. Today, is the topic truly whether you should revive someone? No, it's whether you can let go of someone or not.
What philosophy does this sci-fi situation present? I've been on this show for quite some time, I've seen some come, I've seen some go. Some people were forced to go, they respect the rules. Some go by their own volition, they respect their decision. Some want to challenge the world. On top of that mountain of ambition is the "best model" trophy. Some people want to go on a vacation, their journey is called the space and the ocean. Some people already left this planet, but are still in another universe. Some people are here, some people are here (points to heart). Because, some people are here. Everyday, every year, I listen to the pressing of the button, people want to revive their loved one, why bother even asking, you are meeting your loved one after all? No, I don't press. Because they told me, they lived a whole life of warmth, and the only thing they can't give up is love, and freedom. There are not here, so you think they are gone. But they are here (points to heart), so they have never truly left.
One Piece's Hiluruk used his life goal to create in his mind memories represented by pink snow, everyone beside him laughed at his stupidity, insanity, dumbness, but he succeeded. He let the entire world see his powerful message. Before dying, he said: "You will not die to bullets penetrating your chest. You will not die to an incurable disease. Only being forgotten, is the true death." Those that you truly loved, and left, those men and women who lived on this planet, will never die, because they lived in your heart, as your own pink snow, falling still.
(also in his conclusion, he moved the goalpost to saying that it's about who to press for, since only one most loved one is revived, which concedes that you should press for someone lol)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Nice Guide. I think there's a fourth, trickier refutation (Framework Refutation) where you use emotional ideals situated towards the audience, shifting goals and ideas. But it's harder to pull off in online debating. For example, in I can I BB the con side of "press button to revive most loved one" shifted the framework, saying that we must doubt the gift given to us, and consider the question of possible problems. He cleverly did a strawman where he said it's not about getting the loved one back, it's about moving on (instead of impacts of getting your loved one, he talks about the impacts of letting them die peacefully). Because Pro failed to assert the value of a human life, Con was able to assert the value of freedom and love, the power of the memories overcoming the need to physically have your love by your side.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
according to grammarist, "Rebut means to argue against something, to offer a counterargument. "(https://grammarist.com/usage/rebut-vs-refute/) It's basically a weaker version of Refutation.
Created:
How much I trust the people on the leaderboard
Oromagi: 9.5/10 (chooses very specific topics to suit his winning ideals)
Ragnar: 10/10 (never lost a debate)
Ramshutu: 10/10
MisterChris: 8/10 (Young Earth Creationism? jeez louise)
Trent0405: 7/10 (stacks a dozen sources to prove his point)
RM: 5/10 (unless it's about himself)
semperfortis: 8/10
Blamonkey: 10/10
Intelligence: 7/10
TRN: 6/10 (how the hell did he lose, Trump is Racist)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
@Barney
Any feedback?
Created:
Posted in:
i was curious why multi accounting was considered an issue because everything seems fine as long as the accounts didn’t vote on each other’s debate or debate each other in a rated setting. What’s the problem?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
I don't understand the problem of kritik. It's entirely possible to beat it through frameworks I heard.
Created:
Posted in:
My elo has been dropping and staying below 1,500 so I've decided to officially transfer accounts after these three debates going on (objective science, one world gov, exquisitely poor) have ended. Unless I go back up above 1,500. In the case that I flop, I'd like to say it was nice to practice with this account.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
The 50 Cent Party (wu mao), or 50 Cent Army, is a term for Internet commentators who are reportedly hired by authorities of the People's Republic of China in an attempt to manipulate public opinion to the benefit of the Chinese Communist Part
Created: