Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Irian View Post
    I mean, to a degree they have a point. Winning or losing a debate doesn't make the loser objectively wrong and the winner objectively right.
    it kinda does, if you don't know what you're talking about when you're given a head's-up warning that you will need to argue your point and then defend it then maybe you SHOULDN'T be listened to at all.

  2. #42
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    One path
    Posts
    3,693
    This never-ending hate-train on specific posters don't do you or your argument any favors. Basically just backs up the insane premise of that dirt-rag of a paper. Way to go so wtf are you doing here if that's really your stance?
    If you knew the candle was fire then the meal was cooked a long time ago.

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Malikath View Post
    it kinda does, if you don't know what you're talking about when you're given a head's-up warning that you will need to argue your point and then defend it then maybe you SHOULDN'T be listened to at all.
    You can defend your ideas in other ways besides a debate. Debates are fine if they are well regulated and cut off from the public, but for the most part its all about getting a gotcha moment.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiwack View Post
    This never-ending hate-train on specific posters don't do you or your argument any favors. Basically just backs up the insane premise of that dirt-rag of a paper.
    I'm surprised at how Endus managed to carve out a place in the minds of a lot of people in this place. Its basically a cult.
    Your problem is that you’re more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

  4. #44
    the only reason that id-dominated idiots like the guardian are now turning on intelectual public discourse is the same reasopn gamejournos are calling for easy modes for games with the ability to make them easier already in them.

    they have no actual knowledge on the subjects they cover and have no intent to learn about them, they merely wish to talk and be heard and listened to.
    shame that all of that will be ending soon, it's funny to watch them fail.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Give Sethrak Blizz View Post
    I'm surprised at how Endus managed to carve out a place in the minds of a lot of people in this place. Its basically a cult.
    it's less "carved" than "indented" he had a habit of using the ban-hammer as a debating tool.
    thus the loss of position.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    Who wins from public debate? Liars, bullies and trolls

    From Ben Shapiro offering Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez $10,000 to debate him, to the macho showdown between Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Žižek, public discourse has become debased
    Who determines who is a liar and who is telling the truth? Everybody believes they are right and their opponents are wrong, so they are telling the truth and the others are lying.

    AOC is a dumb, self-absorbed cunt with no qualifications. She's literally a barista.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Malikath View Post
    it kinda does, if you don't know what you're talking about when you're given a head's-up warning that you will need to argue your point and then defend it then maybe you SHOULDN'T be listened to at all.
    I mean, I kind of address that in the rest of my post. You don't have to be honest to debate and as long as your opponent can't pull up actual evidence it simply turns into a "he said, she said" situation instead of a conversation.

    That's why the people who are most effective at debating are people who know how to be aggressive in them. And I don't know about you, but I don't personally think whoever's most effective at being aggressive is a particularly great gauge of knowledge or correctness.

    It's very much possible to be a great at "winning" debates while not actually being particularly smart or right about your subject. The opposite is true, too.

  7. #47
    Merely a Setback Connal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    29,607
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiwack View Post
    This never-ending hate-train on specific posters don't do you or your argument any favors. Basically just backs up the insane premise of that dirt-rag of a paper. Way to go so wtf are you doing here if that's really your stance?
    I brought up Endus not so much as an attack, but as something we were talking about in a few different threads.

    Namely here: https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post51122116

    I don’t hate him.
    Last edited by Connal; 2019-05-05 at 07:17 PM.
    Vocatus atque non vocatus, deus aderit.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Malaky View Post
    You say that, but imagine a Machismo AI.

    "No u" "No u" "No u" "No u"

    ...oh wait, we already have one.
    Endus means well mochomo does not.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Irian View Post
    as long as your opponent can't pull up actual evidence.
    it's your own responsibility to prepare for a debate, it's still a valid loss if you don't.
    sorry, there are no participation trophies for politics.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Malikath View Post
    it's your own responsibility to prepare for a debate, it's still a valid loss if you don't.
    sorry, there are no participation trophies for politics.
    Your opponent often times can't pull up evidence unless you want the live debate to have minutes of silence. That's my entire point.

    Do you have trouble reading?

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Irian View Post
    Your opponent often times can't pull up evidence unless you want the live debate to have minutes of silence. That's my entire point.

    Do you have trouble reading?
    no i don't, i just don't accept your theoretical excuse as a valid reason in the slightest.
    you should have information to back your claims at a debate, if you don't or don't show it it's on you for that loss.

  12. #52
    Merely a Setback Connal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    29,607
    Quote Originally Posted by Irian View Post
    Your opponent often times can't pull up evidence unless you want the live debate to have minutes of silence. That's my entire point.

    Do you have trouble reading?
    Ideally both sides have very good familiarity with the subject if they are going into a debate.

    But currently it’s become about who can memorize and regurgitate data and factoids.

    Anything else is seen as subjective opinion. Which used to have some weight as the sophists understood. Debate is supposed to be practical, not a theoretical/objective exercise.
    Vocatus atque non vocatus, deus aderit.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Malikath View Post
    no i don't, i just don't accept your theoretical excuse as a valid reason in the slightest.
    you should have information to back your claims at a debate, if you don't or don't show it it's on you for that loss.
    And people often do. But "you're wrong" isn't often as compelling as a strong assertion in a debate setting.

    That's the issue with live debates without a proper framework. If it's not properly handled then no information in that debate should be seriously considered. Yes, if two people who have research, statistics, data and information go into a debate with a moderator then it can be lent some credibility, but people don't really demand or expect these things before calling something a debate.

    Worse yet is the huge detail that yes, a singular individual can be wrong on a one-on-one personal level in a debate but that doesn't really mean that the victor's assertions or viewpoints are right and the loser's are wrong. This is a huge detail that a lot of people who don't understand this stuff overlook. Someone can suck ass at debating but that doesn't mean that their personal views are objectively wrong, it just means that they didn't properly do their research.

    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    Ideally both sides have very good familiarity with the subject if they are going into a debate.

    But currently it’s become about who can memorize and regurgitate data and factoids.

    Anything else is seen as subjective opinion. Which used to have some weight as the sophists understood. Debate is supposed to be practical, not a theoretical/objective exercise.
    That's exactly what I mean. I wish more people actually saw it that way.
    Last edited by Irian; 2019-05-05 at 07:31 PM.

  14. #54
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    One path
    Posts
    3,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    I brought up Endus not so much as an attack, but as something we were talking about in a few different threads.

    Namely here: https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post51122116

    I don’t hate him.
    Okay a /s or smiley would've helped, people rarely like the truth or differing logic when it's presented to them, so unless they can teach the AI to disagree with grace it won't make any difference. Even if they did, it would be opposed by the people expecting Skynet with every innovation.
    People want to get a life, think and face themselves. However it's so much easier to get busy with others and feel vindicated once opposed, in contrast to having wasted their time in defeat without learning from their failures.
    If you knew the candle was fire then the meal was cooked a long time ago.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    the sophists
    yeah, I'm sure the shitheads who called for Socrates' death knew nothing worth the charges they asked.

    the reason for debates is for force confrontation between two viewpoints and force resolution, this is as objective and practical as discourse gets, it's you who's arguing for theoretical outliers in an attempt to discredit the attempt of debates to produce an objective outcome out of two potentially subjective points.

    sorry, but no.
    debates are still the best way of removing false-hoods and incorrect ideas.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Irian View Post
    And people often do. But-
    there is no "but" everything else is irrelevant.

    this has been done this way by people with less information at their disposal for thousands of years, you don't get to ask for a less scrutinizing context when you have the entirety of human knowledge on your fucking phones.

    this isn't an excuse, you're expected to know what you're talking about, either learn it or shut-up.

  16. #56
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    One path
    Posts
    3,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Give Sethrak Blizz View Post
    I'm surprised at how Endus managed to carve out a place in the minds of a lot of people in this place. Its basically a cult.
    I think it's just a result of people attacking the messenger instead of the message when they read stuff they disagree with but can't find or formulate the flaw in.
    If you knew the candle was fire then the meal was cooked a long time ago.

  17. #57
    Merely a Setback Connal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    29,607
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiwack View Post
    Okay a /s or smiley would've helped, people rarely like the truth or differing logic when it's presented to them, so unless they can teach the AI to disagree with grace it won't make any difference. Even if they did, it would be opposed by the people expecting Skynet with every innovation.
    People want to get a life, think and face themselves. However it's so much easier to get busy with others and feel vindicated once opposed, in contrast to having wasted their time in defeat without learning from their failures.
    You’re right, I should have either omitted it, or put in a smiley/s.

    I agree about the AI part; but that’s the issue with today’s version of debate. It’s factoid/data regurgitation. An AI would beat most humans at that. Maybe not rainman...
    Last edited by Connal; 2019-05-05 at 07:38 PM.
    Vocatus atque non vocatus, deus aderit.

  18. #58
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    One path
    Posts
    3,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Malikath View Post
    it's less "carved" than "indented" he had a habit of using the ban-hammer as a debating tool.
    thus the loss of position.
    Probably more a result of Poe's law than anything. Modding is hard when people don't check or mark their sarcasm. Even more so online than irl.
    If you knew the candle was fire then the meal was cooked a long time ago.

  19. #59
    Merely a Setback Connal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    29,607
    Quote Originally Posted by Malikath View Post
    yeah, I'm sure the shitheads who called for Socrates' death knew nothing worth the charges they asked.

    the reason for debates is for force confrontation between two viewpoints and force resolution, this is as objective and practical as discourse gets, it's you who's arguing for theoretical outliers in an attempt to discredit the attempt of debates to produce an objective outcome out of two potentially subjective points.

    sorry, but no.
    debates are still the best way of removing false-hoods and incorrect ideas.

    - - - Updated - - -



    there is no "but" everything else is irrelevant.
    Socrates himself was a sophist of sorts. But he valued “Truth” as well, as the early sophists did.

    I am not against debate, I am against data/factoid regurgitation we call debate today.
    Vocatus atque non vocatus, deus aderit.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Malikath View Post
    the only reason that id-dominated idiots like the guardian are now turning on intelectual public discourse is the same reasopn gamejournos are calling for easy modes for games with the ability to make them easier already in them.

    they have no actual knowledge on the subjects they cover and have no intent to learn about them, they merely wish to talk and be heard and listened to.
    shame that all of that will be ending soon, it's funny to watch them fail.

    - - - Updated - - -



    it's less "carved" than "indented" he had a habit of using the ban-hammer as a debating tool.
    thus the loss of position.
    @Endus why are you no longer a mod?
    Your problem is that you’re more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •