Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Topics I want to Debate

Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)
The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 9:48:13 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

I'll bet I can out devil's advocate you.

Here are the one's I'll take:

Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will) - depending on what you mean by this, I'm in.

God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent - Easy peasy if you don't get to define God your way.

Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't - Take the burden of proof and you're toast.

Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con) - This is the one I really want to debate, especially if you don't define it your way, or so I'm thumbing my nose at you on this to get the debate. It's not going to be the "religious" argument you expect, it'll be philosophy and I'll open up a can of scientific whipass on you.

Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro) - I'm gonna have to understand what you mean by "Sound".

The universe is likely acausal (Pro) - Explanation needed, what would the resolution be?

The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con) - Holds for what? Clarify and I'm probably in....especially since this one conflicts with your position on the immediately prior one.

Moral Realism is True (Con) - Want to take the BoP?

Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con) - How is this not in the funny section, but hey, I'm in if you really want to argue it.

Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro) - Thumbing my nose and calling you a nitwit on this one. You know they are two opposing positions don't you, I don't see how you can prove both false without arguing materialism is true, and this dualist will walk all over your punkass on that.

The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro) - Interesting, I'd probably be in on this.

The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro) - Again, unless you define "sound" differently than I do.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:01:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)

This one should be interesting. I have no idea why you have chosen only the book of John though.

The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:16:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)
The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)

Anything I would want to debate are topics that I hold the same position on as you. But consider this a bump ;)
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:23:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 9:48:13 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

I'll bet I can out devil's advocate you.

Which ones of these are your actual positions (i.e. you are not playing DA), because I would rather do a debate where I can change someone's mind (even if the chances are infinitesimally small), since it gives more motivation that way. I can't even hope to chance a mind that already agrees with me.

Here are the one's I'll take:

Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will) - depending on what you mean by this, I'm in.

Omniscience & Libertarian Free Will being compatible.

God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent - Easy peasy if you don't get to define God your way.

Which is why I defined God with those attributes. If you define gGod another way then the debate is not for you.

Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't - Take the burden of proof and you're toast.

Sure, we can do this. There is a long line of people who want to.

Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con) - This is the one I really want to debate, especially if you don't define it your way, or so I'm thumbing my nose at you on this to get the debate. It's not going to be the "religious" argument you expect, it'll be philosophy and I'll open up a can of scientific whipass on you.

Define "Libertarian Free Will"

Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro) - I'm gonna have to understand what you mean by "Sound".

Is true.

The universe is likely acausal (Pro) - Explanation needed, what would the resolution be?

If you don't understand it, then nevermind.

The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con) - Holds for what? Clarify and I'm probably in....especially since this one conflicts with your position on the immediately prior one.

If you don't understand it, then nevermind.

Moral Realism is True (Con) - Want to take the BoP?

No. I have positive arguments anyway though so it doesn't rly matter.

Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con) - How is this not in the funny section, but hey, I'm in if you really want to argue it.

Got other people I would rather debate this on.

Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro) - Thumbing my nose and calling you a nitwit on this one. You know they are two opposing positions don't you, I don't see how you can prove both false without arguing materialism is true, and this dualist will walk all over your punkass on that.

That's a false tri-chotimy. In any case the resolution was for either, you can pick either one to defend.

The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro) - Interesting, I'd probably be in on this.

Would rather debate someone else on it.

The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro) - Again, unless you define "sound" differently than I do.

"True".
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:26:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:01:33 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)

This one should be interesting. I have no idea why you have chosen only the book of John though.

Because I find it the most interesting, and my theological knowledge is pretty limited to the NT, so while I might hold positions on others, I don't think I can debate them very well...

The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:33:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:26:04 AM, Envisage wrote:
At 12/9/2014 11:01:33 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)

This one should be interesting. I have no idea why you have chosen only the book of John though.

Because I find it the most interesting, and my theological knowledge is pretty limited to the NT, so while I might hold positions on others, I don't think I can debate them very well...

Would I be wrong to assume your position is based on objections to theological concepts put forth in John and not from a textual criticism standpoint? If so, I might be interested after a little time to study.

The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:42:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:33:48 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/9/2014 11:26:04 AM, Envisage wrote:
At 12/9/2014 11:01:33 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)

This one should be interesting. I have no idea why you have chosen only the book of John though.

Because I find it the most interesting, and my theological knowledge is pretty limited to the NT, so while I might hold positions on others, I don't think I can debate them very well...

Would I be wrong to assume your position is based on objections to theological concepts put forth in John and not from a textual criticism standpoint? If so, I might be interested after a little time to study.

Both really. The theology clashes violently with the theology of the other Gospels, and also it was written later than the synoptic Gospels, and contradicts them severely on core issues.

I haven't researched the issue deeply, so that's my superficial stance, it might change upon more study. Thought it might be of special interest to theological nerds, lol.

The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 1:36:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:42:39 AM, Envisage wrote:
At 12/9/2014 11:33:48 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/9/2014 11:26:04 AM, Envisage wrote:
At 12/9/2014 11:01:33 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)

This one should be interesting. I have no idea why you have chosen only the book of John though.

Because I find it the most interesting, and my theological knowledge is pretty limited to the NT, so while I might hold positions on others, I don't think I can debate them very well...

Would I be wrong to assume your position is based on objections to theological concepts put forth in John and not from a textual criticism standpoint? If so, I might be interested after a little time to study.

Both really. The theology clashes violently with the theology of the other Gospels, and also it was written later than the synoptic Gospels, and contradicts them severely on core issues.

I haven't researched the issue deeply, so that's my superficial stance, it might change upon more study. Thought it might be of special interest to theological nerds, lol.

That one will be pretty interesting. I'll need to look into the claim before I can determine if I can argue against it. Would you recommend any starting sources?

The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:14:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)
The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)

I like the rapture one.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 2:36:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:23:45 AM, Envisage wrote:
At 12/9/2014 9:48:13 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

I'll bet I can out devil's advocate you.

Which ones of these are your actual positions (i.e. you are not playing DA), because I would rather do a debate where I can change someone's mind (even if the chances are infinitesimally small), since it gives more motivation that way. I can't even hope to chance a mind that already agrees with me.

What I suggested I'd take are in line with my actual positions, philosophically I'm a Dualist, a Theist, a Moral Realist, and I believe we have Free Will. I was just thinking that in most cases I'll be able to devil"s advocate your position in a debate at least as well as you.

Here are the one's I'll take:

Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will) - depending on what you mean by this, I'm in.

Omniscience & Libertarian Free Will being compatible.

Are you pro or con? If you're con I'd take pro. But here I am devil's advocating, I don"t really think the concept of Omniscience is particularly valid, but I can logically argue that the existence of Free Will does not negate the possibility of Omniscience, or conversely, that Omniscience does not negate the existence of Free Will.

God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent - Easy peasy if you don't get to define God your way.

Which is why I defined God with those attributes. If you define gGod another way then the debate is not for you.

Then probably not, first and foremost I define God as "Transcendent", I'd go so far as to think it's idolatrous to believe that God can be fully circumscribed by human conceptual categories of thought. Think Tao, just as the Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao, I think the God that can be described is not the God I'd be talking about. I'm beginning to wonder if you're the literalist.

Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't - Take the burden of proof and you're toast.

Sure, we can do this. There is a long line of people who want to.

Then you should probably debate a few of them first, and then later when you want to have a really interesting Theodicity debate come back and let me know.

Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con) - This is the one I really want to debate, especially if you don't define it your way, or so I'm thumbing my nose at you on this to get the debate. It's not going to be the "religious" argument you expect, it'll be philosophy and I'll open up a can of scientific whipass on you.

Define "Libertarian Free Will"

I define it philosophically as "Free Will that is logically incompatible with Determinism", so the debate would necessarily be me arguing that Free Will exists and therefore Determinism is not true, and you arguing that Determinism is true and therefore Free Will can't exist. A lot of folks try to make Libertarian Free Will a function of magic or a soul as if it"s 400 years ago. If we use the proper philosophical definition then this is the one I really really want to debate. (nose thumbing, raspberries, neener neener, etc)

Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro) - I'm gonna have to understand what you mean by "Sound".

Is true.

OK, I'm in.

The universe is likely acausal (Pro) - Explanation needed, what would the resolution be?

If you don't understand it, then nevermind.

OK, I'm in, I suppose if you want to play semantic games in the debate, I'll just refute them in the debate.

The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con) - Holds for what? Clarify and I'm probably in....especially since this one conflicts with your position on the immediately prior one.

If you don't understand it, then nevermind.

OK, thanks for clarifying, I'm in".and no matter who you agree to debate, I can't wait to see you argue both the Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds AND the Universe is acausal.

Moral Realism is True (Con) - Want to take the BoP?

No. I have positive arguments anyway though so it doesn't rly matter.

OK, I'm still in, but I won"t be taking the BoP either.

Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con) - How is this not in the funny section, but hey, I'm in if you really want to argue it.

Got other people I would rather debate this on.

Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro) - Thumbing my nose and calling you a nitwit on this one. You know they are two opposing positions don't you, I don't see how you can prove both false without arguing materialism is true, and this dualist will walk all over your punkass on that.

That's a false tri-chotimy. In any case the resolution was for either, you can pick either one to defend.

I'm certainly a dualist, kind of substance, kind of not, but I'd be glad to debate it if you want to make it just Dualism is False. I hate the term "Substance Dualist" because I think it's misleading to refer to mind or consciousness as a "substance", but I'm a dualist because I strongly believe that there are two distinct categories of existents...can I at least presume you are some kind of Monist?

The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro) - Interesting, I'd probably be in on this.

Would rather debate someone else on it.

The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro) - Again, unless you define "sound" differently than I do.

"True".

I'm OK if you want to keep it as "Sound" as in "free from mistakes, error or fallacy", but I'm also in if we just say "true" too"I just hate to see debates that digress into semantics, there are quite a few immature people on these boards that just mince words and play games, you know the types, even if you convince them they just change their position and claim they are still right, what I'd call the puerile contrarians.

Like you implied about yourself, I'm just looking for interesting debates with substance, if you want one of those then I'm your man.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 12:32:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 2:03:43 AM, Envisage wrote:
It's that time again when I try to round up potential debaters. Most the topics here apply to religion/philosophy. Here are a bunch of topics I am interested in that are relevant to this forum. Note I can play devils advocate on virtually all of these:

Apologetics (Con):
Argument From Reason
Cosmological Argument(s)
Arguments against naturalism (Evolutionary Argument, etc.)
<Other arguments for God>

Atheology/Counter-Apologetics (Pro):
Theological Fatalism (Omniscience & Free Will)
God is Incoherent - Omnipotence/Omniscience/Omnibenevolence are all independantly incoherent
God cannot be known a priori
Assuming Evil exists, God doesn't

Philosophy:
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con)
Eternalism is most likely true (Pro)
The Human Soul does not exist (Pro)
Model Dependant Reality is a Sound Ontology (Pro)
Epistemological Possibility or Conceivability entails Metaphysical Possibility (Con)
The universe is likely acausal (Pro)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con)
Moral Realism is True (Con)
Raping Children for Fun is Immoral (Con)
Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro)

Christian Philosophy/History/Theology:
The Thombist "God's Essence is Existence" is metaphysically possible (Con)
The Physical Resurrection of Jesus Happened (Con)
The Gospel according to John should be rejected from the New Testament Canon (Pro)
The New Testament is a reliable account of Jesus' History (Con)

Society
Biblical Literalism entails Female Oppression in Society (Pro)
Religion is inherently negative (Con)
A Secular Law best promotes Religious Freedom (Pro)
State Funded Faith Schools (Con)

Science:
YEC is False (Pro)
Intelligent Design is False (Pro)
Universal Common Ancestry (Pro)
The Zero Energy Hypothesis is Sound (Pro)

Misc/Funny
Sacrificing Virgins is a Worthwhile Exercise (Pro)
Best Ways to Initiate the Rapture (Contest)
Under Pantheism, God is Getting Progressively More Autistic (Pro)
Solipsism (Pro)
Noah vs Hercules in a Fist Fight (Either Side)
Objectively, Sean Carroll won his debate with WLC (Pro)

God gave you a lot of ideas to debate. He will win every single time.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2014 11:03:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 2:36:31 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
<Snip>
Libertarian Free Will Exists (Con) - This is the one I really want to debate, especially if you don't define it your way, or so I'm thumbing my nose at you on this to get the debate. It's not going to be the "religious" argument you expect, it'll be philosophy and I'll open up a can of scientific whipass on you.

Define "Libertarian Free Will"

I define it philosophically as "Free Will that is logically incompatible with Determinism", so the debate would necessarily be me arguing that Free Will exists and therefore Determinism is not true

That's not a useful definition. You are basically just arguing "determinism is false", which I would have a separate debate about. I would rather have a more specific debate than Determinism vs Indeterminism.

The Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds (Con) - Holds for what? Clarify and I'm probably in....especially since this one conflicts with your position on the immediately prior one.

If you don't understand it, then nevermind.

OK, thanks for clarifying, I'm in".and no matter who you agree to debate, I can't wait to see you argue both the Principle of Sufficient Reason Holds AND the Universe is acausal.

I am Con on this..... I don't believe the PSR holds (well, I'm actually agnostic on it, I don't have an opinion either way).

Moral Realism is True (Con) - Want to take the BoP?

No. I have positive arguments anyway though so it doesn't rly matter.

OK, I'm still in, but I won"t be taking the BoP either.

Can be shared.

Idealism/Substance Dualism is False (Pro) - Thumbing my nose and calling you a nitwit on this one. You know they are two opposing positions don't you, I don't see how you can prove both false without arguing materialism is true, and this dualist will walk all over your punkass on that.

That's a false tri-chotimy. In any case the resolution was for either, you can pick either one to defend.

I'm certainly a dualist, kind of substance, kind of not, but I'd be glad to debate it if you want to make it just Dualism is False. I hate the term "Substance Dualist" because I think it's misleading to refer to mind or consciousness as a "substance", but I'm a dualist because I strongly believe that there are two distinct categories of existents...can I at least presume you are some kind of Monist?

Something of a monistic realist, whether that is physicalism or something else is another matter.