Home | Community | Message Board


Azarius
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7  [ show all ]
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,088
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #8671677 - 07/23/08 02:44 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

I'm neither confused nor wearing blinders, but thanks ever so much for your concern.  :rolleyes:

I have answered both posts you quoted, and you have continued to ignore what I've said.  Perhaps this is pointless, as you continue to state that the definition of subjective is NOT what the dictionary clearly says it is.

It boils down to this: if it does not exist in the external world, but rather within the mind, it is BY DEFINITION subjective.  If it is subjective, it cannot be objective.  The two are antonyms.

Quote:

The materialists' world is a prison of delusion, trapped in a world of their own making they cannot escape nor understand a common dictionary.





Delusion: A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence.

As there is an unsurprising lack of "invalidating evidence" for the existence of the material world, describing materialism as a delusion is laughable. 

If you don't have anything to offer in support of your assertions, I'll consider this debate over.


Edited by Veritas (07/23/08 02:57 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRoseM
Devil's Advocate
Female User Gallery


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,303
Loc: Mod not God Flag
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Veritas]
    #8671926 - 07/23/08 03:43 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Veritas said:

The M&P forum was created for the sole purpose of providing a safe place to engage in discussion without fear of debate.  Thus, P&S is the :duel: forum.




And yet, EVERY SINGLE DAY, somebody fails to understand this nuance... :shrug:

I'm often surprised by how many people seem to think debate is a bad thing... and how willing they are to debate their point!?!


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleMr. Mushrooms
Spore Print Collector
 User Gallery


Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 13,018
Loc: Registered: 6/04/02
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Rose]
    #8672002 - 07/23/08 03:57 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

All depends on how you define 'debate' doesn't it?

See my previous for the actual definition.

Arguing with dictionaries is like arguing with signposts.  You can argue all day and still be lost.

In the end, it's best to leave some arguments up to the perception of the reader.  They, alone, can determine for themselves where the truth lies.

I've explained this before, but at the risk of repeating myself, something I'm giving to in the futile attempt to explain something that cannot be understood by some people, tendencious polemic is not by necessity a part of philosophical argumentation.

The tendency can be driven by the need for an adrenaline surge and the accompanying endorphins that follow it.  I have neither the time nor the patience nor the energy to allow others to "get high" off of their conversations with me.

Heat and light are not the same thing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll find something that actually interests me.  Quibbling over common definitions in the dictionary in the hopes that a common ground may be had isn't one of them.

Cheerio then...


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRoseM
Devil's Advocate
Female User Gallery


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,303
Loc: Mod not God Flag
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #8672115 - 07/23/08 04:26 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Senor_Hongos said:
All depends on how you define 'debate' doesn't it?
See my previous for the actual definition.





No.

In our last posts, Veritas and I BOTH used the word 'debate' as a noun, meaning an argument between opponents... according to YOUR definition.

Yet, you STILL took exception!?!

So, IF Veritas and I are BOTH using YOUR word according to YOUR definition, why are you still arguing your point to us? You're preaching to the choir... man.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.



Edited by Rose (07/23/08 04:43 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRoseM
Devil's Advocate
Female User Gallery


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,303
Loc: Mod not God Flag
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #8672174 - 07/23/08 04:41 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

Also, your definition... well, it sucks.

Here's a more complete definition for the word 'debate'. I bolded all the non-archaic stuff.

de·bate 

Audio Help  /dɪˈbeɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[di-beyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -bat·ed, -bat·ing.

–noun
1. a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints: a debate in the Senate on farm price supports. 

2. a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers. 

3. deliberation; consideration.


4. Archaic. strife; contention. 

–verb (used without object)
5. to engage in argument or discussion, as in a legislative or public assembly: When we left, the men were still debating. 

6. to participate in a formal debate. 

7. to deliberate; consider: I debated with myself whether to tell them the truth or not.


8. Obsolete. to fight; quarrel. 

–verb (used with object)
9. to argue or discuss (a question, issue, or the like), as in a legislative or public assembly: They debated the matter of free will. 

10. to dispute or disagree about: The homeowners debated the value of a road on the island. 

11. to engage in formal argumentation or disputation with (another person, group, etc.): Jones will debate Smith. Harvard will debate Princeton. 

12. to deliberate upon; consider: He debated his decision in the matter. 


13. Archaic. to contend for or over.

[Origin: 1250–1300; (v.) ME debaten < OF debatre, equiv. to de- de- + batre to beat < L battere, earlier battuere; (n.) ME debat < OF, deriv. of debatre]

—Related forms
de·bat·er, noun
de·bat·ing·ly, adverb


—Synonyms 1. argument, controversy, disputation, contention. 5. dispute, contend. See argue.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.



Edited by Rose (07/23/08 04:52 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,088
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Rose]
    #8672177 - 07/23/08 04:42 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

:rofl2:  :lol:  :crazy:

Just another day at the zoo...er, forum!  :smile:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRoseM
Devil's Advocate
Female User Gallery


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,303
Loc: Mod not God Flag
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Veritas]
    #8672208 - 07/23/08 04:51 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

I am oft surprised by how many people use their words... to make the 'words have no meaning' argument.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,088
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Rose]
    #8672446 - 07/23/08 05:42 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

No, no, words DO have a meaning, just not the one that YOU or I think they have, nor the one the dictionary says they have.  :lol:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRoseM
Devil's Advocate
Female User Gallery


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,303
Loc: Mod not God Flag
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Veritas]
    #8672824 - 07/23/08 07:20 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

So... now that we know what 'debate' means... :smirk:

Let's get back to fallacies.

It is pigheadedness (see the link in the first post) to hide behind creative definitions of words... and it is one of the most common bad tactics, used against logical arguments, in this forum.

The "It depends on what the definition of 'is' is." argument will not fly around here.

Another example of pigheadedness, is when people hide behind their 'faith'.

The most common faith in here seems to be Judeo-Christian New-Age Jack-Buddhism.

This means countless people hide behind their 'Buddhist' beliefs in order to claim things are not real... or reality itself is not real... or words have no meaning.

While these things can make great threads in their own right, they are terrible tactics to use in debate. Suddenly the discussion turns to reality itself, or the meaning of 'meaning'... and the thread about yoga immediately goes off track. I'm guessing 90% that of the deep-thoughts expressed in this forum, are used as diversionary tactics. :smile:

Another note about 'faith'.

If you believe in something FINE. But in this forum, if you say you believe something... IT IS SELF-EVIDENT that somebody else may point out why your beliefs are not real, true, and/or logical.

People in this forum often seem to confuse DEBATE about spirituality, for a personal attack.

Say you start a thread about your bersonal beliefs:

When a person replies and  questions your 'faith', THEY ARE OBEYING THE RULES.

When someone else rebuts by hurling insults, they are BREAKING THE RULES.

This is how the forum works. All the old-timers know it. If you are new to this forum... for the love of God, please don't tell the old-timers how you think this forum works... unless you actually know how this forum works.



Beware all ye who enter here.

Post at your own risk.

Keep your arms and legs inside the ride at all times.

Play fair and have fun.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.



Edited by Rose (07/23/08 07:33 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinebackfromthedead
Activated


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 3,592
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Rose]
    #8673686 - 07/23/08 11:01 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

Dang.:tongue:


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRoseM
Devil's Advocate
Female User Gallery


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,303
Loc: Mod not God Flag
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: backfromthedead]
    #8673848 - 07/23/08 11:40 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

That was a bit of a rant, wasn't it?


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblepolantis
Prototype v7.3 Alpha
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/24/08
Posts: 2,367
Loc: Austraalis Flag
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: backfromthedead]
    #8673857 - 07/23/08 11:42 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

Umm, I'd like to start a debate if thats OK with you guys. Don't mean to interrupt the debate about debating lol.

I was thinking about studying Philosophy at Uni last year. Until I came to this conundrum;

If Philosophy is trying to understand ones thoughts; and in my belief, arranging thoughts into a logical sequence.
Wouldn't it be un-philosophical to dedicate one's self to learning other people's philosophies? 
And then, if I did go to uni and graduated. I couldn't actually contribute any answers to the field as nothing in philosophy can actually be proved.


--------------------
We do not know what we want and yet we are responsible for what we are - that is the fact.
Jean-Paul Sartre


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRoseM
Devil's Advocate
Female User Gallery


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,303
Loc: Mod not God Flag
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: polantis]
    #8676283 - 07/24/08 02:57 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

I degree in philosophy would probably only help you if you wanted a cerreer teaching philosophy. It would be fun to study though.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinedirtydirt
Strangerest
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/05/08
Posts: 134
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Mr. Mushrooms]
    #8677444 - 07/24/08 08:54 PM (9 years, 2 months ago)

Quote:

Senor_Hongos:
Any "worldview" can be an object of intelligible thought.  Since that is the case, all "worldviews" (other than those based entirely on hallucinations) can be and are objective.  The very dialogue exchanged adequately proves this.




Objectivity is not obtained through the direction or focus of intelligible thought. Objectivity only applies to what is undeniably and absolutely true. As extreme skepticism/solipsism is a conjecture which cannot be logically/reasonably denied, objective truth is arguably nonexistant.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisible513orangejuice
...
Female


Registered: 07/19/08
Posts: 397
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: dirtydirt]
    #8680240 - 07/25/08 02:31 PM (9 years, 1 month ago)

WOH are people debating over the word 'debate' ? lol, you people are debataholics and your all addicted ta debatahol


--------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------




                        America is a rapist.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleCameron
Too Many Words
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/31/07
Posts: 4,437
Loc: Canada
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: 513orangejuice]
    #8680585 - 07/25/08 04:22 PM (9 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

lol, you people are debataholics and your all addicted ta debatahol




Them's debatin' words! :box:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblederanger
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/21/08
Posts: 6,840
Loc: off the wall
Re: Philosophical Debate [Re: Cameron]
    #8680607 - 07/25/08 04:28 PM (9 years, 1 month ago)

I'll debate that


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7  [ show all ]

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Fallacies of Philosophical Debate DiploidM 32,244 1 04/14/07 03:48 PM
by Diploid
* The futility of philosophical debate. infidelGOD 1,505 14 06/06/03 04:49 PM
by HagbardCeline
* The Fallacies of Philosophical Debate kimikiri 1,487 7 09/06/07 09:58 AM
by fireworks_god
* these days, most of my philosophical debates happen on Shroomerites Anonymous Sophistic Radiance 892 10 02/26/09 11:59 AM
by Icelander
* The 'Wear you Down' Fallacy OrgoneConclusion 1,137 3 09/20/07 11:06 AM
by fireworks_god
* Debate Technique OrgoneConclusion 2,396 18 03/03/08 11:49 AM
by fireworks_god
* How to find a chakra
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Rahz 4,344 68 11/15/07 02:52 AM
by Kinematics
* Chakras? Do they exist?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 15 16 all )
RoseM 13,726 307 02/04/10 12:57 PM
by Icelander

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Jokeshopbeard, DividedQuantum
9,317 topic views. 6 members, 3 guests and 11 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
The Best Salvia
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.062 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 19 queries.