Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

What you so-and-so's don't seem to get is...

Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 11:12:39 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
You know what you ____________'s can't seem to get through your thick skull/into your pea-brain/into your tiny heads, etc.? You don't get ______________, otherwise known as, (drum roll) my esteemed and unquestionable opinion on this topic.

I hear variations of this a lot. On DDO, on t.v., in movies, on other websites, from people IRL.

But...

You know what you strawman-lovers and headstrong folks don't seem to get?
MY opinion:
A.) People on the other side of the fence don't all have good reasons to believe what they believe. But many do! It is wise to not write everyone off because of some idiot you heard hollering about something or other that one time on the other side of the fence. It seems like those who know the value of a good debate would know that the amount of things which can be argued for successfully is large and contradictory. If that weren't true, then we wouldn't have Philosophy.
B.) YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING! Just because someone disagrees with what you say doesn't mean that they simply don't have access to the holy grail known as The Things You Know. It probably means they have reasons to disagree which they could just as easily (and often do) hold up as a holy grail that you are blissfully unaware of.

All I know is that I know nothing. And something everyone should know is that the "feeling of knowing" exists independent of actual knowledge. The more sure you feel about something, and the more dogmatically you stand by it, the more you should be skeptical of it. One of the least wise things you can do is assume you know something, while at the same time straw-manning your opponent. You do others, and more importantly yourself, a great disservice.

I expected to come across many know-it-alls on this site. I've probably been called it myself a time or two-and probably deserved it. But my goodness, giving your opponent the benefit of the doubt is imperative for a reasoned discussion. If you always view yourself as the person who is doing the teaching instead of the person who is doing the learning, what chance is there for the search for truth??
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 7:27:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 11:12:39 AM, Oryus wrote:
You know what you ____________'s can't seem to get through your thick skull/into your pea-brain/into your tiny heads, etc.? You don't get ______________, otherwise known as, (drum roll) my esteemed and unquestionable opinion on this topic.

I hear variations of this a lot. On DDO, on t.v., in movies, on other websites, from people IRL.

But...

You know what you strawman-lovers and headstrong folks don't seem to get?
MY opinion:
A.) People on the other side of the fence don't all have good reasons to believe what they believe. But many do! It is wise to not write everyone off because of some idiot you heard hollering about something or other that one time on the other side of the fence. It seems like those who know the value of a good debate would know that the amount of things which can be argued for successfully is large and contradictory. If that weren't true, then we wouldn't have Philosophy.
B.) YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING! Just because someone disagrees with what you say doesn't mean that they simply don't have access to the holy grail known as The Things You Know. It probably means they have reasons to disagree which they could just as easily (and often do) hold up as a holy grail that you are blissfully unaware of.

All I know is that I know nothing. And something everyone should know is that the "feeling of knowing" exists independent of actual knowledge. The more sure you feel about something, and the more dogmatically you stand by it, the more you should be skeptical of it. One of the least wise things you can do is assume you know something, while at the same time straw-manning your opponent. You do others, and more importantly yourself, a great disservice.

I expected to come across many know-it-alls on this site. I've probably been called it myself a time or two-and probably deserved it. But my goodness, giving your opponent the benefit of the doubt is imperative for a reasoned discussion. If you always view yourself as the person who is doing the teaching instead of the person who is doing the learning, what chance is there for the search for truth??

Beautiful.

However. Much like all of the other outlets you mentioned, many members of DDO consider it impractical to learn about every subject they have some interest in. Therefore, they will instead espouse an idea that appeals to them for some reason other than empiricism or logic (makes them feel superior/sounds cool/is ideal in relation to their other perspectives), or they will borrow the ideas of another that they respect or have a history of believing.

Admittedly, if we really did invest the time and energy necessary to actually discuss these topics on a sophisticated level, so many of us would not even have the time to participate in the site as much as they do.

In other words, for all intents and purposes, they're right--it is impractical.

However, that leaves the few of us that actually know what we're talking about at a loss.

Not to worry, though. If we can accept that we won't be teaching much, it is still very likely that we will learn. And, that's more valuable, anyway.

^_~
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 9:09:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Yes, this site is filled with boneheads. Of course, I alone have access to THE truth. Not really, but "debate.org" should gjve you an idea of the type of audience this type of place attracts.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 9:13:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 9:09:52 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Yes, this site is filled with boneheads. Of course, I alone have access to THE truth. Not really, but "debate.org" should gjve you an idea of the type of audience this type of place attracts.

No doubt O_o
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
WriterSelbe
Posts: 410
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 9:18:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Wow. What you just said is the reason why I think referencing any philosophy is bull crap because.. Because nothing can be proven as right..
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2011 8:22:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 7:27:25 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/13/2011 11:12:39 AM, Oryus wrote:
You know what you ____________'s can't seem to get through your thick skull/into your pea-brain/into your tiny heads, etc.? You don't get ______________, otherwise known as, (drum roll) my esteemed and unquestionable opinion on this topic.

I hear variations of this a lot. On DDO, on t.v., in movies, on other websites, from people IRL.

But...

You know what you strawman-lovers and headstrong folks don't seem to get?
MY opinion:
A.) People on the other side of the fence don't all have good reasons to believe what they believe. But many do! It is wise to not write everyone off because of some idiot you heard hollering about something or other that one time on the other side of the fence. It seems like those who know the value of a good debate would know that the amount of things which can be argued for successfully is large and contradictory. If that weren't true, then we wouldn't have Philosophy.
B.) YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING! Just because someone disagrees with what you say doesn't mean that they simply don't have access to the holy grail known as The Things You Know. It probably means they have reasons to disagree which they could just as easily (and often do) hold up as a holy grail that you are blissfully unaware of.

All I know is that I know nothing. And something everyone should know is that the "feeling of knowing" exists independent of actual knowledge. The more sure you feel about something, and the more dogmatically you stand by it, the more you should be skeptical of it. One of the least wise things you can do is assume you know something, while at the same time straw-manning your opponent. You do others, and more importantly yourself, a great disservice.

I expected to come across many know-it-alls on this site. I've probably been called it myself a time or two-and probably deserved it. But my goodness, giving your opponent the benefit of the doubt is imperative for a reasoned discussion. If you always view yourself as the person who is doing the teaching instead of the person who is doing the learning, what chance is there for the search for truth??

Beautiful.

However. Much like all of the other outlets you mentioned, many members of DDO consider it impractical to learn about every subject they have some interest in. Therefore, they will instead espouse an idea that appeals to them for some reason other than empiricism or logic (makes them feel superior/sounds cool/is ideal in relation to their other perspectives), or they will borrow the ideas of another that they respect or have a history of believing.

Admittedly, if we really did invest the time and energy necessary to actually discuss these topics on a sophisticated level, so many of us would not even have the time to participate in the site as much as they do.

In other words, for all intents and purposes, they're right--it is impractical.

However, that leaves the few of us that actually know what we're talking about at a loss.

Not to worry, though. If we can accept that we won't be teaching much, it is still very likely that we will learn. And, that's more valuable, anyway.

^_~

It's true that we can't all gain proficiency in all the topics discussed here. If you were to stalk my posts, you'd find that I'm perfectly o.k. with people talking about something they don't know that much about because I do it myself.

What I dislike is when those ill-informed beliefs (or any belief, for that matter) are presented very dogmatically and without any admission of dogma/emotional reactions, etc.

The main thing I'm really concerned with is the fact that people who believe different ideologies rarely give their opponents the benefit of the doubt. It's very rare that someone will say "ok, show me" instead of "I'll show them."
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2011 8:29:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 9:18:19 PM, WriterSelbe wrote:
Wow. What you just said is the reason why I think referencing any philosophy is bull crap because.. Because nothing can be proven as right..

But that's why it's philosophy! We're still working out the kinks. Psychology and many other sciences used to be considered philosophy until we learned facts about them. I can't think of anything more frightening than a world without philosophy. The fact of unanswered questions in the world, in a way, is part of my fuel for living and learning. Knowing philosophical arguments, I feel at least, is to be on the cusp of knowledge. What could be cooler than knowing the best possible argument for any given position?

I don't think that referencing a philosophical argument is bull crap at all- primarily because it is terribly unavoidable. Even those who don't study philosophy reference famous philosophical arguments all the time- oftentimes of their own accord and their own reasoning. And you bring up another good reason to give the opponent the benefit of the doubt- many things cannot be proven. Many arguments we give on this site are forceful and not valid. People would do well to recognize that fact.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
WriterSelbe
Posts: 410
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2011 9:07:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/14/2011 8:29:30 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:18:19 PM, WriterSelbe wrote:
Wow. What you just said is the reason why I think referencing any philosophy is bull crap because.. Because nothing can be proven as right..

But that's why it's philosophy! We're still working out the kinks. Psychology and many other sciences used to be considered philosophy until we learned facts about them. I can't think of anything more frightening than a world without philosophy. The fact of unanswered questions in the world, in a way, is part of my fuel for living and learning. Knowing philosophical arguments, I feel at least, is to be on the cusp of knowledge. What could be cooler than knowing the best possible argument for any given position?

I don't think that referencing a philosophical argument is bull crap at all- primarily because it is terribly unavoidable. Even those who don't study philosophy reference famous philosophical arguments all the time- oftentimes of their own accord and their own reasoning. And you bring up another good reason to give the opponent the benefit of the doubt- many things cannot be proven. Many arguments we give on this site are forceful and not valid. People would do well to recognize that fact.

I guess the reason why I state so is because when one person has one philosophy as a value and another has one philosophy as a value and the two are the exact opposite the whole argument is a waste of time. The whole debate is wasted on something that cannot be proven while nothing factual is actually debated.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2011 9:35:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/14/2011 9:07:59 PM, WriterSelbe wrote:
At 12/14/2011 8:29:30 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:18:19 PM, WriterSelbe wrote:
Wow. What you just said is the reason why I think referencing any philosophy is bull crap because.. Because nothing can be proven as right..

But that's why it's philosophy! We're still working out the kinks. Psychology and many other sciences used to be considered philosophy until we learned facts about them. I can't think of anything more frightening than a world without philosophy. The fact of unanswered questions in the world, in a way, is part of my fuel for living and learning. Knowing philosophical arguments, I feel at least, is to be on the cusp of knowledge. What could be cooler than knowing the best possible argument for any given position?

I don't think that referencing a philosophical argument is bull crap at all- primarily because it is terribly unavoidable. Even those who don't study philosophy reference famous philosophical arguments all the time- oftentimes of their own accord and their own reasoning. And you bring up another good reason to give the opponent the benefit of the doubt- many things cannot be proven. Many arguments we give on this site are forceful and not valid. People would do well to recognize that fact.

I guess the reason why I state so is because when one person has one philosophy as a value and another has one philosophy as a value and the two are the exact opposite the whole argument is a waste of time. The whole debate is wasted on something that cannot be proven while nothing factual is actually debated.

Well, I suppose it depends on what your goal is, then. If what you want is fact, then yes, philosophy would be a waste of time for you. But I certainly don't see how the wisdom gained from the reasoning and logic of philosophical arguments couldn't be seen as a goal in itself. Or the act of argument and arguing a fun activity and talent to have.

If you believe in objective truth or objective morality, etc, then you might believe that there actually are correct answers which can be proven and simply haven't been proven yet. So the search continues....

Either way, I find bouncing ideas off of other people fun in itself. The challenge of refuting points is fun- even if there isn't a concrete right answer.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
WriterSelbe
Posts: 410
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2011 9:38:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/14/2011 9:35:28 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 12/14/2011 9:07:59 PM, WriterSelbe wrote:
At 12/14/2011 8:29:30 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:18:19 PM, WriterSelbe wrote:
Wow. What you just said is the reason why I think referencing any philosophy is bull crap because.. Because nothing can be proven as right..

But that's why it's philosophy! We're still working out the kinks. Psychology and many other sciences used to be considered philosophy until we learned facts about them. I can't think of anything more frightening than a world without philosophy. The fact of unanswered questions in the world, in a way, is part of my fuel for living and learning. Knowing philosophical arguments, I feel at least, is to be on the cusp of knowledge. What could be cooler than knowing the best possible argument for any given position?

I don't think that referencing a philosophical argument is bull crap at all- primarily because it is terribly unavoidable. Even those who don't study philosophy reference famous philosophical arguments all the time- oftentimes of their own accord and their own reasoning. And you bring up another good reason to give the opponent the benefit of the doubt- many things cannot be proven. Many arguments we give on this site are forceful and not valid. People would do well to recognize that fact.

I guess the reason why I state so is because when one person has one philosophy as a value and another has one philosophy as a value and the two are the exact opposite the whole argument is a waste of time. The whole debate is wasted on something that cannot be proven while nothing factual is actually debated.

Well, I suppose it depends on what your goal is, then. If what you want is fact, then yes, philosophy would be a waste of time for you. But I certainly don't see how the wisdom gained from the reasoning and logic of philosophical arguments couldn't be seen as a goal in itself. Or the act of argument and arguing a fun activity and talent to have.

If you believe in objective truth or objective morality, etc, then you might believe that there actually are correct answers which can be proven and simply haven't been proven yet. So the search continues....

Either way, I find bouncing ideas off of other people fun in itself. The challenge of refuting points is fun- even if there isn't a concrete right answer.

Yeah, I like philosophy. Just not as a way to win a debate.
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 7:25:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Philosophy is all fine and dandy in a "hypothetical" discussion or an approach to a problem. But sooner or later a concrete reality based decision must be made based on available facts and or the rule of law.

The big problem with philosophy arguments is skewing of the facts and misinterpretation of the law to fit a philosophy.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%