Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

My Religious Debate Portfolio

Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I am primarily here on DDO to debate. This is for those who are interested in reading one or two half decent religious debates, or to post their own, or to shoot me a challenge or something.

Meh.

I thought I would compile a portfolio of the religious debates I have done on DDO. I have definitely done too many now... Meh. They're still fun though.

Anyway, shoot me a PM if you are interested in debating a religious topic with me. Chances are I will take it, even on devil's advocate. Note that I do have a backlog of a couple promised debates at the moment, however. Enjoy!

General God's Existence:

Does God Exist? Vs Toviyah
7.5/10 - Heavyweight debate on modal epistemology and modal metaphysics. Two very unusual arguments of Toviyah's discussed.

God Exists Vs Zmikecuber
8/10 - Devils Advocate for both sides. Standard arguments (fine tuning & KCA) discussed, I think this debate has pretty good and deep content on the arguments on both sides. Plenty of rhetoric.

Science Has Rendered Theism Unreasonable Vs Jellon
http://www.debate.org...
8.5/10 - Devil's Advocate. I really enjoyed this debate, and it seems the voters did too. Lots of very unusual arguments against God's existence here, regarding theories of time, interactionism and arguments against God as a necessary being. Arguments for metaphysical naturalism.

Strong Atheism is a Sound Position vs Daley
http://www.debate.org...
7/10 - Arguments from noncognitivism, rationality of skepticism and theological fatalism discussed for atheism, and moral argument for God for theism. Pretty fun read.

It is unreasonable to not believe in God Vs Bible2000
http://www.debate.org...
6/10 - An Ejaculation of half a dozen arguments a piece. Read if you fancy a bit of everything. A bit of a sloppy debate.

God Most Likely Exists Vs Zmikecuber
8/10 - Berkeley's God of Idealism discussed. Pretty entertaining debate. Modal Argument against materialism discussed, as well as law of indecernibles and implications of free will.

The Deistic God Vs Iredia
http://www.debate.org...
5.5/10 - A bit of a drag due to Iredia's poor logical construction and my lack of understanding of theory of mind philosophy. Gets repetitive but argument from causal gap between consciousness and matter discussed.

Belief in God is reasonable
http://www.debate.org...
5/10 - Gish Gallop! A blow-by-blow debate on 7 separate arguments for God.

Specific Arguments:

Problem of Evil Vs Wylted
http://www.debate.org...
7/10 - A rather atypical debate which includes modal arguments from evil and the evil God hypothesis. Standard theodicies discussed.

Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

A Cosmological Argument for God is Sound vs Tahir.Imanov
http://www.debate.org...
4/10 - Lazy Debate. Some discussion about substance dualism here

Presuppositional Arguments For God Are Incoherent Fallacious Nonsense! Vs Sagey
http://www.debate.org...
9/10 - Devil's Advocate. I only gave this a high score because Sagey is pretty much universally detested by people who try to do religion debates that are constantly votebombed by him. Read if you desire to see a satisfying mauling of Sagey.

Christianity

The Genesis account of creation is not mythical Vs Truth Seeker
http://www.debate.org...
5/10 - Mergh, boiled down to semantics. Some okay content on mythology and science.

Belief In Christianity is Rational Vs Truth Seeker
http://www.debate.org...
6/10 History of the composition and transmission of Gospels discussed at length. Some okay content here. TS had a rather weird debate strategy that just didn't work.

The Bible is of Divine Origins Vs MarionBeasely
http://www.debate.org...
3/10 - Opponent Plagiarised, some ok content on the notion of knowing the bible is divinely inspired.

Jesus Existed vs Wylted
http://www.debate.org...
6/10 - Lazy by Wylted, and sloppy by myself. Evidence and evaluation of the likelihood of Jesus' existence discussed. Most historical evidences touched upon.

Science

Young Earth Creationism is Improbable Vs Pitbul15
http://www.debate.org...
5/10 - Devil's Asvocate. Opponent Forfeited, but my Presuppositional arguments may be of interest.

Evolution's Mechanism Vs Creationtruth
http://www.debate.org...
7/10 - Devil's Advocate. I think this debate has pretty good content. Typical science discussed.

Intelligent Design Vs GarretKadeDupre
http://www.debate.org...
4/10 - Got trolled a bit by Gade. Only read if you are interested in abiogenesis

Intelligent Design Vs V3nesl
http://www.debate.org...
5.5/10 - Pretty much the same as the debate with Garret, more content.

Rationality of Intelligent Design Vs Jellon
http://www.debate.org...
7.5/10 - Abiogenesis discussed. Much more compelling debate than vs V3nesl or Garret, much of the same content covered.

Evidence exists that is more logical for creationist than evolutionist conclusions Vs Jzyehoshua
http://www.debate.org...
7.5/10 Radiometric Dating vs Five Arguments for Creationism. Unusual, science heavy debate.

Life Originally Arose via. Abiogenesis Vs JoePalscak
http://www.debate.org...
8.5/10 - Solid Debate. Thermodynamic arguments, and arguments from the nature of information and improbability discussed.

Intelligent Design vs Mykeil
http://www.debate.org...
6/10 - Debate doesn't really start until the third round. Argument from inferred design discussed, and how a system from which design can be recognised is discussed.

Abiogenesis Vs Creationtruth
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - RNA World Hypothesis Discussed. Unfortunately FF by Con. Current scientific issues regarding RNA World Hypothesis discussed.

Evolution is Falsified Vs GarretKadeDupre
http://www.debate.org...
8/10 - A pretty fun debate, I got a bit trolled too in the process. Some interesting stuff on Germ-Cell Formation Mechanisms and their Evolution (or lack of).

Other Philosophy:

Evolution + Naturalism cannot be rationally affirmed Vs Toviyah
http://www.debate.org...
Misc:
7.5/10 - I had to drop the lack round but this debate had some uncommon arguments for telos and argument from reason.

Better Than Deserved Vs GodChoosesLife
?/10 - Not sure how to rate this. It's okay I guess, covers the notion that Christians have it better than they deserve.

Is Theism Potent in Explanations? vs ChristusExemplar
http://www.debate.org...
8/10 - I really liked this debate, covered extensively the explanato
Toviyah
Posts: 88
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 6:31:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Nice to see a complete works of envisage, you've done loads of interesting debates lol

I want to debate you again at some point, but I'm struggling to find the time atm.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 4:16:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 6:31:17 PM, Toviyah wrote:
Nice to see a complete works of envisage, you've done loads of interesting debates lol

I want to debate you again at some point, but I'm struggling to find the time atm.

People in DDO keep moaning that I do too many religious debates... Which I believe is true. But I have too much fun doing them... And now I am of the mind not to care much... Maybe I can double my portfolio, lol.

Sure, I will look forward to it. Let's try and get a few people to commit to vote on it before though, especially since I felt really bad that your last debate got decided by my vote alone.
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 4:17:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 4:16:37 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/5/2015 6:31:17 PM, Toviyah wrote:
Nice to see a complete works of envisage, you've done loads of interesting debates lol

I want to debate you again at some point, but I'm struggling to find the time atm.

People in DDO keep moaning that I do too many religious debates... Which I believe is true. But I have too much fun doing them... And now I am of the mind not to care much... Maybe I can double my portfolio, lol.

Sure, I will look forward to it. Let's try and get a few people to commit to vote on it before though, especially since I felt really bad that your last debate got decided by my vote alone.

I love your religious debates. I pretty much only read religious debates and certain science or philosophy ones.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 5:07:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
More people here need to be like you.
Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

Voting Standards: https://goo.gl...

And please disable Smart-Quotes: https://goo.gl...
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,954
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 5:25:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'm surprised by debate with you even got a 5. I feel like I've improved my arguments since then. I still have a problem with making too many implicit assumptions while debating though.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 5:32:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 5:25:20 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
I'm surprised by debate with you even got a 5. I feel like I've improved my arguments since then. I still have a problem with making too many implicit assumptions while debating though.

Well the ratings are entirely subjective of my own opinion of how good I think the debate is, and it's reading value. So all debates will have some reading value. A lot of things were discussed in that debate which I do think have reasoning value even if the arguments I don't think are very strong.

It's more of a guideline on which debates are better than other (an 8.5/10 being a better read than a 3/10) than as an objective statement that 'it's a five!'
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:18:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

Lol IUSS. I disagree with it even more now than I did after the debate, the debate would progress very, very differently if we did it now.
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:23:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:18:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

Lol IUSS.

What does this mean? Some form of: I don't care?

I disagree with it even more now than I did after the debate, the debate would progress very, very differently if we did it now.

Why do you disagree with it even more?
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:28:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:23:18 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:18:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

Lol IUSS.

What does this mean? Some form of: I don't care?

http://www.urbandictionary.com...

I disagree with it even more now than I did after the debate, the debate would progress very, very differently if we did it now.

Why do you disagree with it even more?

Because you can get around it by:

1. Arguing for pantheism
2. Arguing for two conditions during one event (a lack of universe and presence of universe), or it's conception followed by it's actualisation, which would provide two independant necessary environments for which omnipotence and omniscience would be demonstrable.

I argued (implicitly) for the latter in our debate, although I wasn't explicit, but the former is a much more compelling way around it. Plus if theism was true then I think it would be pantheism that would follow anyway.
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:39:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
I am primarily here on DDO to debate. This is for those who are interested in reading one or two half decent religious debates, or to post their own, or to shoot me a challenge or something.

Meh.

I thought I would compile a portfolio of the religious debates I have done on DDO. I have definitely done too many now... Meh. They're still fun though.

Anyway, shoot me a PM if you are interested in debating a religious topic with me. Chances are I will take it, even on devil's advocate. Note that I do have a backlog of a couple promised debates at the moment, however. Enjoy!

I think I would really like to do formal debates here, but I have no experience in the formal debate process. I need a mentor as I lack confidence and I think one would greatly help me. However I have no idea how to go about finding one. I admire several people here for their knowledge and obvious skills. Maybe I should just say it outright. Somebody teach me please. =)
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:41:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:28:30 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:23:18 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:18:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

Lol IUSS.

What does this mean? Some form of: I don't care?

http://www.urbandictionary.com...

I disagree with it even more now than I did after the debate, the debate would progress very, very differently if we did it now.

Why do you disagree with it even more?

Because you can get around it by:

1. Arguing for pantheism

So God is the universe, therefore it knows everything and can do anything? I have a feeling I missed something...

2. Arguing for two conditions during one event (a lack of universe and presence of universe), or it's conception followed by it's actualisation, which would provide two independant necessary environments for which omnipotence and omniscience would be demonstrable.

But the debate was about a single instance showing both conditions; that's what Intelligent Design is.


I argued (implicitly) for the latter in our debate, although I wasn't explicit, but the former is a much more compelling way around it. Plus if theism was true then I think it would be pantheism that would follow anyway.

Depends on the type of theism, wouldn't it? At least, certainly he Christian one would have this condition you're talking about.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:41:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:39:05 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
I am primarily here on DDO to debate. This is for those who are interested in reading one or two half decent religious debates, or to post their own, or to shoot me a challenge or something.

Meh.

I thought I would compile a portfolio of the religious debates I have done on DDO. I have definitely done too many now... Meh. They're still fun though.

Anyway, shoot me a PM if you are interested in debating a religious topic with me. Chances are I will take it, even on devil's advocate. Note that I do have a backlog of a couple promised debates at the moment, however. Enjoy!

I think I would really like to do formal debates here, but I have no experience in the formal debate process. I need a mentor as I lack confidence and I think one would greatly help me. However I have no idea how to go about finding one. I admire several people here for their knowledge and obvious skills. Maybe I should just say it outright. Somebody teach me please. =)

I have no formal debating experience either. I just made stuff up as I go along. Watched a few apologist vs atheist spoken debates and followed a similar format, and eventually learned to debate by debating on DDO.

It's not that hard really, try not to be verbose and make lots of substantiated points and keep a tight logical progression. Works well for all types of debates and not just religious.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:47:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:41:35 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:28:30 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:23:18 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:18:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

Lol IUSS.

What does this mean? Some form of: I don't care?

http://www.urbandictionary.com...

I disagree with it even more now than I did after the debate, the debate would progress very, very differently if we did it now.

Why do you disagree with it even more?

Because you can get around it by:

1. Arguing for pantheism

So God is the universe, therefore it knows everything and can do anything? I have a feeling I missed something...

Yes. There are several ways to necessitate that from the notion there is a designer of the universe, although these do require additional arguments. But your debate was 'via. Intelligent design' rather than 'Intelligent Design cannot demonstrate', thus ID can be a starting component in a logical progression rather than the entire argument.

2. Arguing for two conditions during one event (a lack of universe and presence of universe), or it's conception followed by it's actualisation, which would provide two independant necessary environments for which omnipotence and omniscience would be demonstrable.

But the debate was about a single instance showing both conditions; that's what Intelligent Design is.

Exactly.

I argued (implicitly) for the latter in our debate, although I wasn't explicit, but the former is a much more compelling way around it. Plus if theism was true then I think it would be pantheism that would follow anyway.

Depends on the type of theism, wouldn't it? At least, certainly he Christian one would have this condition you're talking about.

Well, pantheism and Christianity aren't mutually exclusive, but in any case there is a huge gap between a philosophically demonstrated God and a religious God. A light-years wide gap, even.

I would like to do some debates on trinitarianism, thombist, etc. with the presupposition that *a* God exists, but it seems that it's an even more arduous task than to just getting to *a* God in the first place.
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 6:58:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:47:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:41:35 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:28:30 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:23:18 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:18:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

Lol IUSS.

What does this mean? Some form of: I don't care?

http://www.urbandictionary.com...

I disagree with it even more now than I did after the debate, the debate would progress very, very differently if we did it now.

Why do you disagree with it even more?

Because you can get around it by:

1. Arguing for pantheism

So God is the universe, therefore it knows everything and can do anything? I have a feeling I missed something...

Yes. There are several ways to necessitate that from the notion there is a designer of the universe, although these do require additional arguments. But your debate was 'via. Intelligent design' rather than 'Intelligent Design cannot demonstrate', thus ID can be a starting component in a logical progression rather than the entire argument.

Intelligent Design is incompatible with this argument, due to the single instance in ID and the 2 instances in your argument.


2. Arguing for two conditions during one event (a lack of universe and presence of universe), or it's conception followed by it's actualisation, which would provide two independant necessary environments for which omnipotence and omniscience would be demonstrable.

But the debate was about a single instance showing both conditions; that's what Intelligent Design is.

Exactly.

That's why I won the debate, lol.


I argued (implicitly) for the latter in our debate, although I wasn't explicit, but the former is a much more compelling way around it. Plus if theism was true then I think it would be pantheism that would follow anyway.

Depends on the type of theism, wouldn't it? At least, certainly he Christian one would have this condition you're talking about.

Well, pantheism and Christianity aren't mutually exclusive, but in any case there is a huge gap between a philosophically demonstrated God and a religious God. A light-years wide gap, even.

Agreed.


I would like to do some debates on trinitarianism, thombist, etc. with the presupposition that *a* God exists, but it seems that it's an even more arduous task than to just getting to *a* God in the first place.

Never heard of those things, lol. But it sounds like God is just too hard to prove, which is a shame because I saw your thread about Nihilism sucking and I reckon you would be a lot happier with belief in a god.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 7:06:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:58:41 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:47:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:41:35 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:28:30 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:23:18 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:18:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

Lol IUSS.

What does this mean? Some form of: I don't care?

http://www.urbandictionary.com...

I disagree with it even more now than I did after the debate, the debate would progress very, very differently if we did it now.

Why do you disagree with it even more?

Because you can get around it by:

1. Arguing for pantheism

So God is the universe, therefore it knows everything and can do anything? I have a feeling I missed something...

Yes. There are several ways to necessitate that from the notion there is a designer of the universe, although these do require additional arguments. But your debate was 'via. Intelligent design' rather than 'Intelligent Design cannot demonstrate', thus ID can be a starting component in a logical progression rather than the entire argument.

Intelligent Design is incompatible with this argument, due to the single instance in ID and the 2 instances in your argument.

Here:

1. ID Necitates Pantheism
2. Pantheism entails omnipotence and omniscience
C. ID Entails omnipotence and omniscience

#1 can be demonstrated by arguing that an external God is incoherent, thus God must be internal. Argue that the universe must be of the same fundemental material cause as God, and wala, one way to get to pantheism from ID. Loads of other ways too, such as the nature of mind, etc.

2. Arguing for two conditions during one event (a lack of universe and presence of universe), or it's conception followed by it's actualisation, which would provide two independant necessary environments for which omnipotence and omniscience would be demonstrable.

But the debate was about a single instance showing both conditions; that's what Intelligent Design is.

Exactly.

That's why I won the debate, lol.

You won because I wasn't very explicit in attacking your dilemma arguments. Not because your dilemma is sound.

I argued (implicitly) for the latter in our debate, although I wasn't explicit, but the former is a much more compelling way around it. Plus if theism was true then I think it would be pantheism that would follow anyway.

Depends on the type of theism, wouldn't it? At least, certainly he Christian one would have this condition you're talking about.

Well, pantheism and Christianity aren't mutually exclusive, but in any case there is a huge gap between a philosophically demonstrated God and a religious God. A light-years wide gap, even.

Agreed.


I would like to do some debates on trinitarianism, thombist, etc. with the presupposition that *a* God exists, but it seems that it's an even more arduous task than to just getting to *a* God in the first place.

Never heard of those things, lol. But it sounds like God is just too hard to prove, which is a shame because I saw your thread about Nihilism sucking and I reckon you would be a lot happier with belief in a god.

=p Work in progress, I don't intend to try and believe in God though, I would rather remain intellectually honest first. Aparently people who read a lot are less happy than those who spend more time having sex, being married and socialising... Guess that means I should hurry up and drop DDO.
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 8:56:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 7:06:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:58:41 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:47:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:41:35 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:28:30 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:23:18 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:18:45 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

Lol IUSS.

What does this mean? Some form of: I don't care?

http://www.urbandictionary.com...

I disagree with it even more now than I did after the debate, the debate would progress very, very differently if we did it now.

Why do you disagree with it even more?

Because you can get around it by:

1. Arguing for pantheism

So God is the universe, therefore it knows everything and can do anything? I have a feeling I missed something...

Yes. There are several ways to necessitate that from the notion there is a designer of the universe, although these do require additional arguments. But your debate was 'via. Intelligent design' rather than 'Intelligent Design cannot demonstrate', thus ID can be a starting component in a logical progression rather than the entire argument.

Intelligent Design is incompatible with this argument, due to the single instance in ID and the 2 instances in your argument.

Here:

1. ID Necitates Pantheism
2. Pantheism entails omnipotence and omniscience
C. ID Entails omnipotence and omniscience

#1 can be demonstrated by arguing that an external God is incoherent, thus God must be internal. Argue that the universe must be of the same fundemental material cause as God, and wala, one way to get to pantheism from ID. Loads of other ways too, such as the nature of mind, etc.

Fine. You're right...


2. Arguing for two conditions during one event (a lack of universe and presence of universe), or it's conception followed by it's actualisation, which would provide two independant necessary environments for which omnipotence and omniscience would be demonstrable.

But the debate was about a single instance showing both conditions; that's what Intelligent Design is.

Exactly.

That's why I won the debate, lol.

You won because I wasn't very explicit in attacking your dilemma arguments. Not because your dilemma is sound.

Still bitter :)


I argued (implicitly) for the latter in our debate, although I wasn't explicit, but the former is a much more compelling way around it. Plus if theism was true then I think it would be pantheism that would follow anyway.

Depends on the type of theism, wouldn't it? At least, certainly he Christian one would have this condition you're talking about.

Well, pantheism and Christianity aren't mutually exclusive, but in any case there is a huge gap between a philosophically demonstrated God and a religious God. A light-years wide gap, even.

Agreed.


I would like to do some debates on trinitarianism, thombist, etc. with the presupposition that *a* God exists, but it seems that it's an even more arduous task than to just getting to *a* God in the first place.

Never heard of those things, lol. But it sounds like God is just too hard to prove, which is a shame because I saw your thread about Nihilism sucking and I reckon you would be a lot happier with belief in a god.

=p Work in progress, I don't intend to try and believe in God though, I would rather remain intellectually honest first. Aparently people who read a lot are less happy than those who spend more time having sex, being married and socialising... Guess that means I should hurry up and drop DDO.

The problem with lowering yourself like that is that you're too smart to chase that kind of carrot-on-a-stick for too long. You'll be wanting more from life quite quickly.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 8:56:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

What type of idiot loses that debate?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 8:58:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 6:39:05 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
I am primarily here on DDO to debate. This is for those who are interested in reading one or two half decent religious debates, or to post their own, or to shoot me a challenge or something.

Meh.

I thought I would compile a portfolio of the religious debates I have done on DDO. I have definitely done too many now... Meh. They're still fun though.

Anyway, shoot me a PM if you are interested in debating a religious topic with me. Chances are I will take it, even on devil's advocate. Note that I do have a backlog of a couple promised debates at the moment, however. Enjoy!

I think I would really like to do formal debates here, but I have no experience in the formal debate process. I need a mentor as I lack confidence and I think one would greatly help me. However I have no idea how to go about finding one. I admire several people here for their knowledge and obvious skills. Maybe I should just say it outright. Somebody teach me please. =)

I'm not the best person but I may be the best person available. I'm willing to take you on. I don't lose religious debates, no matter what side I take, except for the one about Jesus being an alien.
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:01:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 8:56:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

What type of idiot loses that debate?

I promise you, when I eventually beat you multiple times in debates, you are going to be teased, ridiculed, insulted and undermined into oblivion. Every time you do something like this, you are going to get 10 times the amount of muck you gave me. Then we'll see if you find this funny.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:02:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 9:01:10 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 8:56:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

What type of idiot loses that debate?

I promise you, when I eventually beat you multiple times in debates, you are going to be teased, ridiculed, insulted and undermined into oblivion. Every time you do something like this, you are going to get 10 times the amount of muck you gave me. Then we'll see if you find this funny.

That type of stuff turns me on, so it's really win win for me.
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:05:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 9:02:15 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:01:10 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 8:56:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

What type of idiot loses that debate?

I promise you, when I eventually beat you multiple times in debates, you are going to be teased, ridiculed, insulted and undermined into oblivion. Every time you do something like this, you are going to get 10 times the amount of muck you gave me. Then we'll see if you find this funny.

That type of stuff turns me on, so it's really win win for me.

Well I'll find another way to get at you, something clever that destroys you on the inside. I don't ever lose 3 times to anyone on ANYTHING and let people get away with it.
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:05:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 8:58:30 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:39:05 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
I am primarily here on DDO to debate. This is for those who are interested in reading one or two half decent religious debates, or to post their own, or to shoot me a challenge or something.

Meh.

I thought I would compile a portfolio of the religious debates I have done on DDO. I have definitely done too many now... Meh. They're still fun though.

Anyway, shoot me a PM if you are interested in debating a religious topic with me. Chances are I will take it, even on devil's advocate. Note that I do have a backlog of a couple promised debates at the moment, however. Enjoy!

I think I would really like to do formal debates here, but I have no experience in the formal debate process. I need a mentor as I lack confidence and I think one would greatly help me. However I have no idea how to go about finding one. I admire several people here for their knowledge and obvious skills. Maybe I should just say it outright. Somebody teach me please. =)

I'm not the best person but I may be the best person available. I'm willing to take you on. I don't lose religious debates, no matter what side I take, except for the one about Jesus being an alien.

Lol! Were you pro or con? Jesus could totally be an alien. ;)
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:07:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 9:05:05 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:02:15 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:01:10 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 8:56:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

What type of idiot loses that debate?

I promise you, when I eventually beat you multiple times in debates, you are going to be teased, ridiculed, insulted and undermined into oblivion. Every time you do something like this, you are going to get 10 times the amount of muck you gave me. Then we'll see if you find this funny.

That type of stuff turns me on, so it's really win win for me.

Well I'll find another way to get at you, something clever that destroys you on the inside. I don't ever lose 3 times to anyone on ANYTHING and let people get away with it.

We're so much alike that I suspect you know exactly how to get at me. I'm glad you're kind, though.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:08:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 9:05:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/6/2015 8:58:30 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:39:05 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
I am primarily here on DDO to debate. This is for those who are interested in reading one or two half decent religious debates, or to post their own, or to shoot me a challenge or something.

Meh.

I thought I would compile a portfolio of the religious debates I have done on DDO. I have definitely done too many now... Meh. They're still fun though.

Anyway, shoot me a PM if you are interested in debating a religious topic with me. Chances are I will take it, even on devil's advocate. Note that I do have a backlog of a couple promised debates at the moment, however. Enjoy!

I think I would really like to do formal debates here, but I have no experience in the formal debate process. I need a mentor as I lack confidence and I think one would greatly help me. However I have no idea how to go about finding one. I admire several people here for their knowledge and obvious skills. Maybe I should just say it outright. Somebody teach me please. =)

I'm not the best person but I may be the best person available. I'm willing to take you on. I don't lose religious debates, no matter what side I take, except for the one about Jesus being an alien.

Lol! Were you pro or con? Jesus could totally be an alien. ;)

I was pro :( Envisage couldn't even argue it straight up. He noob sniped me
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:12:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 9:07:44 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:05:05 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:02:15 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:01:10 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 8:56:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

What type of idiot loses that debate?

I promise you, when I eventually beat you multiple times in debates, you are going to be teased, ridiculed, insulted and undermined into oblivion. Every time you do something like this, you are going to get 10 times the amount of muck you gave me. Then we'll see if you find this funny.

That type of stuff turns me on, so it's really win win for me.

Well I'll find another way to get at you, something clever that destroys you on the inside. I don't ever lose 3 times to anyone on ANYTHING and let people get away with it.

We're so much alike that I suspect you know exactly how to get at me. I'm glad you're kind, though.

Lol, kind? I won't hurt you too much, when I win. Just enough to break you a bit so I can put you back together, if I want. You'll see...
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:19:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 9:12:07 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:07:44 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:05:05 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:02:15 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:01:10 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/6/2015 8:56:06 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/6/2015 6:13:56 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 1/5/2015 5:57:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
Via Intelligent Design, an infinitely-inteligent, creator god cannot be logically justified Vs Zarroette
http://www.debate.org...
6.5/10 - Devils Advocate. FTA discussed, debate boiled down to overcoming the omnipotence/omniscience dilemma from one evidential action, which I still disagree with.

Underlined translation: I'm still cranky that I lost.

What type of idiot loses that debate?

I promise you, when I eventually beat you multiple times in debates, you are going to be teased, ridiculed, insulted and undermined into oblivion. Every time you do something like this, you are going to get 10 times the amount of muck you gave me. Then we'll see if you find this funny.

That type of stuff turns me on, so it's really win win for me.

Well I'll find another way to get at you, something clever that destroys you on the inside. I don't ever lose 3 times to anyone on ANYTHING and let people get away with it.

We're so much alike that I suspect you know exactly how to get at me. I'm glad you're kind, though.

Lol, kind? I won't hurt you too much, when I win. Just enough to break you a bit so I can put you back together, if I want. You'll see...

That's very sweet of you.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2015 2:28:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 8:55:00 PM, Wylted wrote:
You conveniently left out the one you noob sniped about Jesus being an alien.

If I included my FF'd and sniped/troll debates this list would be twice as long