You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>    >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message

Pages:  1    

Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Wed, 3rd Dec '08 11:10 PM


I started 'thinking out loud' about this topic on another thread, and thought perhaps it deserved its own seperate treatment. Here's the beginning of my ramble, and some of it was just me thinking out loud so I cut some out:

Just out of curiosity, is anyone here interested in "formal" debates? It is part of the philosophical tradition.....I have "some" interest in them, and some trepidation as well, I prefer something more akin to a "knowledge" exchange, but maybe they would be beneficial to the group. To learn more, to add to my knowledge. I guess I sense the possibility of hostility or hurt feelings here...but we could try a few, "experiment" with them if there is high interest in them.....we would need rules, the outsiders could all moderate, we would adhere to certain standards, etc.

If the concept of a "winner" and "loser" that comes with debates also implies that the loser is wrong and the winner is "right", I don't think they would be helpful in light of the goals of the group, which is merely to change ourselves and to learn, but we could think about them anyways. Perhaps not having a winner, merely an open ended debate/discussion, an eternal debate with no winners or losers, unless someone wants to abandon their own position in favor of another view, or just move on to another thread? I was kind of looking at the differing styles of debating out there, and the Karl Popper format seemed like a possibility, although, without the time restrictions.

I guess in all of our views there is probably going to be some either some "faith" or "irrationality", and I think not having true winners or losers would account for this and give everyone the feeling that such "faith" is okay with the group, the purpose wasn't to change someone anyways.....merely to clarify, to further our knowledge, to increase our skills, etc. I would like to give my personal opinion that I'd like to participate in "this kind" of debate...just because rationality is the ideal doesn't mean we should be expected to live up to it every moment of our waking lives.... Still, it would be a goal of mine.

Here's a resource to get us started if anybody is interested in this kind of a debate:

Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Wed, 3rd Dec '08 11:20 PM

Also, I don't think the concept of a "time limit" would be helpful in this forum, we are all very busy....but if you even want to debate my suggestions about how to best debate, go ahead!!

Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Thu, 4th Dec '08 12:16 AM

Maybe re-thinking the "nature" of debate is a waste of time....whatever, I'm up for whatever. Not time limits though...too busy.

Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Mon, 15th Dec '08 12:53 AM

Lol, I finally realized what all my rambling was about on this thread, I think I came too heavily under William James' influence as a kid, very pragmatic approach to debating there.......Alan said he would be interested in a debate. Not quite sure how to set one up though, Gfawkes, if you're out there, go ahead and start a debate thread on a topic that interests you, I'll be sure to jump in.

Davidf  (Level: 102.1 - Posts: 746)
Sat, 20th Dec '08 11:13 AM

How about a debate centered around one word 'why'

Why are you doing what you do?

Smokydevil  (Level: 163.0 - Posts: 5381)
Sat, 20th Dec '08 2:38 PM

The only problem with that David is that half the time....I have no clue, lol

Oogie54  (Level: 209.2 - Posts: 1120)
Sat, 20th Dec '08 10:41 PM

Oh Yeah! Well my schizoid egos can beat up yours....

Pages:  1    

Copyright © 2003-2017 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus