News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

I Challenge You To a Debate

Started by Casparov, April 18, 2014, 09:52:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Casparov

5 pages in and nobody wants to step into the ring. I'm not going to turn this thread into a "me vs the atheist forum" debate thread. I created this thread for the purpose of finding an Atheist on this forum willing to have a legitimate debate in the way this section of your forum was intended to be used. I still have no takers.

If there is anyone who is willing to accept the challenge the offer is still on the table.
“The Fanatical Atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures whoâ€"in their grudge against traditional religion as the "opium of the masses"â€"cannot hear the music of other spheres.” - Albert Einstein

Shiranu

I say this not having read any other posts; I am not sure what you want to debate.

If you want us to prove the Abrahamic God is false, that is quite easy as he is a logical impossibility and proves himself nonexistent. If you want us to prove the Greek Pantheon to be false, all we need do is travel to Mt. Olympus.

However there are some mainstream Gods (not to even get into the millions of ways "God" can be personally interpreted) that cannot be proven to not exist... though likewise they cannot be proven to exist and thus require "faith". There is no point arguing over the existence of these because ultimately it would be like arguing if there is a rock on Pluto the shape of Texas that's gravity caused 50 pounds of dirt to shift over the past 10,000 years... it is quite possible there could be but there is neither any way to prove it or any reason to just assume its true.

There are very few god's I can see that are worth debating over; the one's that are wrong have been proven wrong from centuries of arguments and the one's that cannot be proven or disproven have no reason to be debated.
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Mr.Obvious

You may want to check my reply on page 4
"If we have to go down, we go down together!"
- Your mum, last night, requesting 69.

Atheist Mantis does not pray.

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: Casparov on April 24, 2014, 01:10:53 AM
I still have no takers.
For the second time:

Offer a concrete, falsifiable position, and I will debate you myself.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

Casparov

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on April 24, 2014, 02:13:43 AM
You may want to check my reply on page 4

My answer to your reply on page 4 is: Humor me.

If you are accepting the invitation let's get this party started.

I think a good rule would be to go post for post. After a post, we must wait for the response before posting again. There should be no double posting. we should also have a page limit. I think 21 pages would be a decent number. Should we flip a coin to see who goes first? I guess we will let the normal forum mods be considered the "moderators". I'm sure they'll jump in when they see fit. Any other rules that would be beneficial?
“The Fanatical Atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures whoâ€"in their grudge against traditional religion as the "opium of the masses"â€"cannot hear the music of other spheres.” - Albert Einstein

Mr.Obvious

#80
Quote from: Casparov on April 24, 2014, 02:26:20 AM
I think a good rule would be to go post for post. After a post, we must wait for the response before posting again.  There should be no double posting. we should also have a page limit. I think 21 pages would be a decent number.

agreed

But claryfication needed on what consists of 'double posting'.

Quote from: Casparov on April 24, 2014, 02:26:20 AM
Should we flip a coin to see who goes first?

How would that work online? You pick.

Quote from: Casparov on April 24, 2014, 02:26:20 AM
I guess we will let the normal forum mods be considered the "moderators". I'm sure they'll jump in when they see fit.

I think they should be asked if they want to spend any time on that rather than assuming something like that.

Quote from: Casparov on April 24, 2014, 02:26:20 AM
Any other rules that would be beneficial?

Not any rule that I can think of. Except perhaps a timeframe
Though a clear idea of what the debate would be about would be helpfull.
"If we have to go down, we go down together!"
- Your mum, last night, requesting 69.

Atheist Mantis does not pray.

Casparov

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on April 24, 2014, 02:39:31 AM
agreed

But claryfication needed on what consists of 'double posting'.

by "double posting" I mean it should go: You, me, you, me, you, me, you... post for post.
Not: You, me, me, me, you, you, me, me, me, me, you.

QuoteHow would that work online? You pick.

Okay, I'll go first since this debate is my idea.

QuoteI think they should be asked if they want to spend any time on that rather than assuming something like that.

True. I'll just assume they'll jump in if they want to for any reason. I doubt there will be any need for moderation.

QuoteNot any rule that I can think of. Except perhaps a timeframe
Though a clear idea of what the debate would be about would be helpfull.

Do we agree that the debate ends after 21 pages? Im open to suggestions. I propose the topic be "The Existence of God" since this is an Atheist forum. Bases on previous discussion and definitions provided I assume you understand what I mean when I say the word "god"? Or do I need to further clarify?
“The Fanatical Atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures whoâ€"in their grudge against traditional religion as the "opium of the masses"â€"cannot hear the music of other spheres.” - Albert Einstein

Mr.Obvious

Quote from: Casparov on April 24, 2014, 03:04:09 AM
Do we agree that the debate ends after 21 pages? Im open to suggestions. I propose the topic be "The Existence of God" since this is an Atheist forum. Bases on previous discussion and definitions provided I assume you understand what I mean when I say the word "god"? Or do I need to further clarify?

Come to think of it, 21 pages may be a long time. What is it, 15 posts per page? That would be 315 posts just between the two of us. Perhaps 11 pages would be better, 165 comments by two people is still much more than I think we would fill. I'm actually afraid that it'll get repetitive way before that.

I think I'm as close to understanding your definition of God as I'll ever be.
"If we have to go down, we go down together!"
- Your mum, last night, requesting 69.

Atheist Mantis does not pray.

Casparov

How about we let the people vote on the number of pages? 11? 21? Somewhere in between? Less? More?

Once they've reached a decision, we shall begin. (unless there's anything else)
“The Fanatical Atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures whoâ€"in their grudge against traditional religion as the "opium of the masses"â€"cannot hear the music of other spheres.” - Albert Einstein

Mr.Obvious

Quote from: Casparov on April 24, 2014, 03:29:25 AM
How about we let the people vote on the number of pages? 11? 21? Somewhere in between? Less? More?

Once they've reached a decision, we shall begin. (unless there's anything else)

I don't mind, but I'd actually be surprised if anyone is vested enough in this debate for that. I'd actually be surprised if people other than us would start to read what is essentialy going to be a conversation between the two of us.
"If we have to go down, we go down together!"
- Your mum, last night, requesting 69.

Atheist Mantis does not pray.

Shiranu

I will read it, but the amount of pages is really kinda irrelevant to me. I cant see it going past 3 pages w/o getting too repetitive... perhaps 6?
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Icarus

You could make the debate 10000 pages and you'd accomplish as much as a 1/2 page debate. Length is irrelevant when there is no purpose.

Jason78

I for one can't wait to find out what Casparov thinks conciousness is.
Winner of WitchSabrinas Best Advice Award 2012


We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real
tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. -Plato

Shol'va

#88
How about this rule.
You can't move forward with the argument unless you have addressed all the points the other person raised, in a concise, explicit, clear and conclusive manner.

And on the other hand, do not be insincere and raise a point just to score a "gotcha" point. The contentions must be legit.

Here's another rule. No dishonest debate tactics, no engaging in semantics, no clever attempts to misrepresent and shift the burden of proof.

No logical fallacies, no assertions without at least an explanation as to why to back them up and/or external references.

The intros should also clearly establish each person's views: are you a skeptic, atheist, materialist, theist, etc. to rule out the possibility of talking past each other.

Make NO statements about the other person's positions without explicitly asking them first where they stand. For example, no "you're a materialist" or "you're a nihilist"!


I would be willing and more than happy to moderate and interject when necessary. I'm no stranger to objectivity. In fact my profession requires it.

I think a limit on pages makes sense, but this limit may be extended at the discretion of the moderator if a good reason is provided and inquiry is necessary for further clarification.

Agreed?

pioteir

Now You just took every possible way for Casper to make his point. All he does is semantics, shifting burden of proof and logical fallacies, assertions and least of all making clear, concise and coclusive arguments.
Theology is unnecessary. - Stephen Hawking