Author Topic: Debate Challenges  (Read 27086 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11810
  • Darwins +297/-82
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #232 on: January 26, 2014, 04:25:15 PM »
Unfortunately, Godexists declined via PM, and apparently decided not to post about it here like I had asked him to do.

He's a plagiarising coward, why would he? Also, why would you want to debate someone who not only plagiarizes but always links most of his answers? This guy rarely says anything himself. You wouldn't be debating him but the myriad of websites he'd link or plagiarize from.

-Nam
A god is like a rock: it does absolutely nothing until someone or something forces it to do something. The only capability the rock has is doing nothing until another force compels it physically to move.

The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4726
  • Darwins +534/-13
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #233 on: January 27, 2014, 09:28:10 AM »
Thus the rules I set up.  He wouldn't have been able to do that without breaking the rules, and if he had broken the rules too many times he would have lost the debate by default, if only because everyone else would have recognized that he didn't have an actual argument.  It would have required him to be intellectually honest, and he chose not participating because he recognized it, I think.  Which doesn't mean he didn't expose himself as a conniving coward who ran from a challenge.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1845
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #234 on: January 27, 2014, 11:22:34 AM »
Thus the rules I set up.  He wouldn't have been able to do that without breaking the rules, and if he had broken the rules too many times he would have lost the debate by default, if only because everyone else would have recognized that he didn't have an actual argument.  It would have required him to be intellectually honest, and he chose not participating because he recognized it, I think.  Which doesn't mean he didn't expose himself as a conniving coward who ran from a challenge.

When Christians can't be intellectually honest (b/c they know doing so would mean having to abandon their faith) they run away or press on with more dishonesty!
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Habenae Est Dominatus

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
  • Darwins +0/-11
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #235 on: April 30, 2014, 10:49:19 AM »
I challenge a group spokesperson to a formal debate. Since Hatter23's sniping is the reason for this, I would prefer it be him. If not, then whoever wishes to step to the plate. I don't want to deal with whipsawing I've been getting so I am specific in the term spokesperson. I will not be reading the commentary thread.

As the topic says:  Belief in authority is a religion.

To prove this assertion, I need only expose that the belief continues to exist after authority is shown to be non-existent (Illegitimate authority is not authority).

The following points will be introduced to the formal debate by myself, one at a time.

101. Admit or Deny that you were not born my king, my superior, nor my sovereign, you were not born with a higher rank than I.

102. Admit or Deny that therefore, you DO NOT have authority to command me by your mere birth.

103. Admit or Deny that if this is true for you, it is true for every other human being born on the planet.

104. Admit or Deny that if no one has a rank higher than mine, then no one has authority to command me.

108. Admit or Deny that if no one has authority to command me, then no one has the authority to choose someone to have authority to command me.

109. Admit or Deny thus it does not matter how many people vote to give a politician authority, if they do not have the authority to command me, they do not have the authority to give that politician the authority to command me.

110. Admit or Deny that therefore if you elect a politician, that does not give the politician the authority to command me.

111. Admit or Deny that if the politician does not have authority to command me, then it matters not if I am standing within the boundaries of any territory the politician believes is his to control.

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12217
  • Darwins +267/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #236 on: April 30, 2014, 04:30:37 PM »
104 has already been denied by everyone you're addressing.

Rather than repeat yourself blindly, why don't you honestly re-assess your reasoning?
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #237 on: April 30, 2014, 04:45:13 PM »
I invite magicmiles to prove that objective morality exists.

I just saw this. I'll have to decline sorry. I'd be biting off more than I can chew (in terms of time commitment)
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4726
  • Darwins +534/-13
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #238 on: April 30, 2014, 07:08:09 PM »
Indeed.  HED, you've built your argument on the premise that one must have a higher birth rank in order to have authority over another.  However, this is clearly not the only way to gain rank, or for that matter to gain authority.  The military uses ranks to delineate authority which are clearly not based on birth, for example.  That's why #104 fails - because you have not established that others cannot have a higher rank than you, or that they cannot derive authority from some other source besides rank.  You've only established that nobody has a higher birth rank than you.  But even if you had established that nobody had a higher rank than you, period, you still would not have established that nobody had authority over you.

Can you acknowledge that your logic is flawed, or at least incomplete?  If not, there's no point in having a debate with you.

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #239 on: May 07, 2014, 12:23:25 PM »
Defiance challenged me to defend the position that it is perfectly logical for heaven, hell, and god to exist.
Could we create a discussion about that?
You're worth more than my time

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12125
  • Darwins +645/-27
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #240 on: May 07, 2014, 01:11:02 PM »
Defiance challenged me to defend the position that it is perfectly logical for heaven, hell, and god to exist.
Could we create a discussion about that?

yep. 
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10777
  • Darwins +274/-34
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #241 on: May 11, 2014, 12:14:20 PM »
I hereby challenge any and all theists (though only one should accept, as I will not debate all of them at once) to present a single, rational, contradiction and fallacy-free argument for the existence of their chosen deity. No plagiarizing, obviously.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #242 on: May 11, 2014, 12:26:12 PM »
I accept the challenge :)
You're worth more than my time

Offline Disciple of Sagan

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 934
  • Darwins +54/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Current mood: Malcontent
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #243 on: May 11, 2014, 12:34:54 PM »
I accept the challenge :)

Before you do, Luk, could you please answer my last post on the "cloak and dagger" thread? Thanks.
The cosmos is also within us. We are made of star stuff.

The only thing bigger than the universe is humanity's collective sense of self-importance.

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10777
  • Darwins +274/-34
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #244 on: May 11, 2014, 12:59:46 PM »
I accept the challenge :)

Well now, isn't this a surprise? I didn't expect any theist to actually accept. Let's set the rules by PM, then talk to one of the admins so they can open up a thread for us.
EDIT: I do want to note, though, that, even if you manage to do what I challenged you to, it doesn't prove a deity. It just proves one is not impossible (which is not the same as "likely").
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #245 on: May 15, 2014, 05:32:52 PM »
I challenge junebug72 to demonstrate that Catholicism will destroy God.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11810
  • Darwins +297/-82
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #246 on: May 15, 2014, 05:41:17 PM »
I'll take her off my ignore just to read that.

-Nam
A god is like a rock: it does absolutely nothing until someone or something forces it to do something. The only capability the rock has is doing nothing until another force compels it physically to move.

The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1845
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #247 on: May 17, 2014, 06:06:51 PM »
I challenge Lukvance to demonstrate the independent ontological existence of the alleged deity "Yahweh".

The debate heading can be: Does Yahweh Exist?

FORMAT (somewhat open):

1. Opening statements and/or informal questioning (affirmative starts)
2. Rebuttal rounds
3. Closings

-Moderators will decide when each round is finished as well as any other deemed necessary perimeters.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #248 on: May 17, 2014, 06:31:57 PM »
Sorry median, I already demonstrated the existence of God. Yahweh is just one of his synonyms.
Maybe a more precise subject that you want us to debate on?
You're worth more than my time

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1845
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #249 on: May 17, 2014, 06:35:02 PM »
Sorry median, I already demonstrated the existence of God. Yahweh is just one of his synonyms.
Maybe a more precise subject that you want us to debate on?

No, you didn't demonstrate the actual existence of a God. You just claimed it, but I'm not surprised at your reaction here since it's evidently clear that you can't meet the challenge.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #250 on: May 17, 2014, 06:50:00 PM »
Oh? But the 2 debates are almost close. Wait a bit and we'll see if I proved it or not.
I didn't want to start a third debate on the exact same subject. But if you really want to I am available.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #251 on: July 15, 2014, 03:44:04 PM »
So, who's up next for a debate? :) I think I discouraged those I was debating with.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #252 on: July 16, 2014, 03:45:31 AM »
So, who's up next for a debate? :) I think I discouraged those I was debating with.

I havent done one for while, if you want a partner.  Not sure what subject we'd have though.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #253 on: July 16, 2014, 12:24:56 PM »
Hmm What about that one I'm having a good time with some people on Google+ community with it : "How would God want us to respond to aggression and terrorism?" Or another subject that is close to my heart :"How would you describe God and why?"
I understand that these are more ideas than a debate subject. I suppose that there is a way to formulate them so it fits the debate format.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #254 on: July 17, 2014, 03:52:35 AM »
Hmm What about that one I'm having a good time with some people on Google+ community with it : "How would God want us to respond to aggression and terrorism?" Or another subject that is close to my heart :"How would you describe God and why?"
I understand that these are more ideas than a debate subject. I suppose that there is a way to formulate them so it fits the debate format.

Hum - yes, I don't see either of them being "debates" with theist/atheist - though I could see the first at least being interesting between two theists with different views.  I'll think on.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline junebug72

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2008
  • Darwins +72/-80
  • Gender: Female
  • "Question Everything"
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #255 on: July 17, 2014, 05:35:33 AM »
So, who's up next for a debate? :) I think I discouraged those I was debating with.

Buddy you haven't discouraged me.  If you had it's not something I would brag about.  If you knew Jesus you would know he likes humility.

If you made me feel anything it was sadness.  Sad that an intelligent young man can not see, hear or speak the truth.

The only thing discouraging about you is your own ego.
Belief in a cruel God makes a cruel man.
Thomas Paine

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/thomas_paine.html#XXwlhVIMq06zWg2d.99

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #256 on: July 17, 2014, 07:51:02 PM »
Hum - yes, I don't see either of them being "debates" with theist/atheist - though I could see the first at least being interesting between two theists with different views.  I'll think on.
True, true. Is there something that you have trouble understanding about theists? I mean I understand Atheists I just don't think they have the correct answer to life.
There was this debate on youtube long ago. Maybe It could be a good subject. Is the Catholic church a force for good in the world?
You're worth more than my time

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1845
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #257 on: July 18, 2014, 01:52:39 AM »
Hum - yes, I don't see either of them being "debates" with theist/atheist - though I could see the first at least being interesting between two theists with different views.  I'll think on.
True, true. Is there something that you have trouble understanding about theists? I mean I understand Atheists I just don't think they have the correct answer to life.
There was this debate on youtube long ago. Maybe It could be a good subject. Is the Catholic church a force for good in the world?

No, you do not understand atheists at all, and this statement demonstrates it. B/c if you did you would know that atheism has NOTHING to do with "the correct answer to life". Atheism makes no positive claims. It is not a "worldview". It is not a positive position on the question and it has no beliefs or dogmas. So you are severely misguided as to who were are.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2014, 01:54:54 AM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #258 on: July 18, 2014, 02:42:17 AM »
Is the Catholic church a force for good in the world?

Sounds potentially interesting.  Would you be prepared to argue the "no" position?
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline Lukvance

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1795
  • Darwins +13/-231
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #259 on: July 19, 2014, 04:20:02 PM »
Of course I would argue that the Catholic church IS a force for good in the world.
And Median. I don't find your criticism very constructive do you have a subject in mind that would please you?
You're worth more than my time

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #260 on: July 20, 2014, 05:46:01 AM »
Of course I would argue that the Catholic church IS a force for good in the world.

That wasn't what I asked.  I asked if you would be prepared to argue the other position.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?