Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-07-2014, 04:15 AM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
(13-07-2014 03:59 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  He says "(He'd) like to come back to Mark's atheistic commitments here. i have a question about what that would entail. ... In an atheist universe, you have a universe that's ultimately meaningless, and contingency would be ultimate, and that would mean that anything might have happened or could have happened. I wanna know how he thinks intelligent historical research could precede in an atheist universe.
...
to do research, you have to arrive at probable conclusions, but it seems to me in a universe where contingency is ultimate, you wouldn't even be able arrive at probable conclusions; you'd have to assume the validity of the inductive principal and you can't really do that as an atheist. How can you do that as an atheist? You'd have to have a Christian presupposition."

These questions really are the worst because when you're in a live situation you're expecting an intelligent question, not word salad. It's garbage in garbage out. There's no way you can provide a meaningful answer to a meaningless question. But you can tackle the conclusion of a meaningless question.

If you can recognise it in time as a word salad though all I would hope for is to seize upon a single sentence where he has expressed his point concisely.

For example the following question by itself is easy to answer.

"I wanna know how he thinks intelligent historical research could precede in an atheist universe."

Remember, the audience won't understand his question either, they'll just be looking at how confidently you will answer it. So don't get bogged down in his mire. Only he understands what he means.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
13-07-2014, 04:21 AM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
(13-07-2014 03:59 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 02:29 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I actually felt quite embarrassed that I had no idea what the caller at 102:38 was asking.

Can anyone else makes sense of his question?

You mean Caller 204?

He says "(He'd) like to come back to Mark's atheistic commitments here. i have a question about what that would entail. ... In an atheist universe, you have a universe that's ultimately meaningless, and contingency would be ultimate, and that would mean that anything might have happened or could have happened. I wanna know how he thinks intelligent historical research could precede in an atheist universe.
...
to do research, you have to arrive at probable conclusions, but it seems to me in a universe where contingency is ultimate, you wouldn't even be able arrive at probable conclusions; you'd have to assume the validity of the inductive principal and you can't really do that as an atheist. How can you do that as an atheist? You'd have to have a Christian presupposition."

Personally, I can't make heads nor tails of his argument.

He uses phrases like 'inductive principle' but doesn't define them; I am guessing he is trying to allude to the Problem of Induction which, according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica is
Quote: problem of induction, problem of justifying the inductive inference from the observed to the unobserved. It was given its classic formulation by the Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711–76), who noted that all such inferences rely, directly or indirectly, on the rationally unfounded premise that the future will resemble the past.
This doesn't really seem applicable as discussing the probability of an event doesn't really rely on the assumption that the future would resemble the past...

Anybody else want to step up tot he plate; Philosobull is about twenty kilometres out of my ball park.

Phew ! I'm glad I'm not the only one confused! LOL
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 04:31 AM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
(13-07-2014 04:15 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 03:59 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  He says "(He'd) like to come back to Mark's atheistic commitments here. i have a question about what that would entail. ... In an atheist universe, you have a universe that's ultimately meaningless, and contingency would be ultimate, and that would mean that anything might have happened or could have happened. I wanna know how he thinks intelligent historical research could precede in an atheist universe.
...
to do research, you have to arrive at probable conclusions, but it seems to me in a universe where contingency is ultimate, you wouldn't even be able arrive at probable conclusions; you'd have to assume the validity of the inductive principal and you can't really do that as an atheist. How can you do that as an atheist? You'd have to have a Christian presupposition."

These questions really are the worst because when you're in a live situation you're expecting an intelligent question, not word salad. It's garbage in garbage out. There's no way you can provide a meaningful answer to a meaningless question. But you can tackle the conclusion of a meaningless question.

If you can recognise it in time as a word salad though all I would hope for is to seize upon a single sentence where he has expressed his point concisely.

For example the following question by itself is easy to answer.

"I wanna know how he thinks intelligent historical research could precede in an atheist universe."

Remember, the audience won't understand his question either, they'll just be looking at how confidently you will answer it. So don't get bogged down in his mire. Only he understands what he means.

Thankyou.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 04:48 AM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
(13-07-2014 04:15 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 03:59 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  He says "(He'd) like to come back to Mark's atheistic commitments here. i have a question about what that would entail. ... In an atheist universe, you have a universe that's ultimately meaningless, and contingency would be ultimate, and that would mean that anything might have happened or could have happened. I wanna know how he thinks intelligent historical research could precede in an atheist universe.
...
to do research, you have to arrive at probable conclusions, but it seems to me in a universe where contingency is ultimate, you wouldn't even be able arrive at probable conclusions; you'd have to assume the validity of the inductive principal and you can't really do that as an atheist. How can you do that as an atheist? You'd have to have a Christian presupposition."

These questions really are the worst because when you're in a live situation you're expecting an intelligent question, not word salad. It's garbage in garbage out. There's no way you can provide a meaningful answer to a meaningless question. But you can tackle the conclusion of a meaningless question.

If you can recognise it in time as a word salad though all I would hope for is to seize upon a single sentence where he has expressed his point concisely.

For example the following question by itself is easy to answer.

"I wanna know how he thinks intelligent historical research could precede in an atheist universe."

Remember, the audience won't understand his question either, they'll just be looking at how confidently you will answer it. So don't get bogged down in his mire. Only he understands what he means.

Here are some definitions....but I don't think they help....

contingency |kənˈtɪndʒ(ə)nsi|
noun (pl.contingencies)
a future event or circumstance which is possible but cannot be predicted with certainty: a detailed contract which attempts to provide for all possible contingencies.
• a provision for a possible event or circumstance: stores were kept as a contingency against a blockade.
• an incidental expense. allow an extra fifteen per cent on the budget for contingencies.
• [ mass noun ] the absence of certainty in events: the island's public affairs can occasionally be seen to be invaded by contingency.
• [ mass noun ] Philosophy the absence of necessity; the fact of being so without having to be so.

ultimate |ˈʌltɪmət|
adjective
1 being or happening at the end of a process; final: their ultimate aim was to force his resignation.
• basic or fundamental: the ultimate constituents of anything that exists are atoms.
• Physics denoting the maximum possible strength or resistance beyond which an object breaks.
2 being the best or most extreme example of its kind: the ultimate accolade.
noun
1 (the ultimate) the best achievable or imaginable of its kind: the ultimate in decorative luxury.
2 a final or fundamental fact

inductive |ɪnˈdʌktɪv|
adjective
1 characterized by the inference of general laws from particular instances: instinct rather than inductive reasoning marked her approach to life.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 06:22 AM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
(12-07-2014 10:52 PM)Freethought Wrote:  What I liked most was when you quoted Jesus and his intention "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, it is not peace I have come to bring but a sword."

This is one of my favorite quotes as well. It shakes the foundation of what most Christians believe about Jesus.

I will listen to the whole thing later today, when I have more time...

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
13-07-2014, 07:26 AM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
overall nicely done. Live debate, like all other forms of public interpersonal communications, you get smoother, more relaxed and confident with each one. Great job Mark.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
13-07-2014, 07:46 AM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
(13-07-2014 07:26 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  overall nicely done. Live debate, like all other forms of public interpersonal communications, you get smoother, more relaxed and confident with each one. Great job Mark.

On the subject, I couldn't help but notice, but Mark was greatly improved in his expression from the last time I heard him speak on the issue.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 03:31 PM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
(13-07-2014 07:26 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  overall nicely done. Live debate, like all other forms of public interpersonal communications, you get smoother, more relaxed and confident with each one. Great job Mark.


Thanks heaps! I appreciate anyone devoting 2 hours to listen...there are no visuals....and it can be boring. If I get invited again, I'll be 100% better...I'm on a steep learning curve.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 03:36 PM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
(13-07-2014 07:46 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 07:26 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  overall nicely done. Live debate, like all other forms of public interpersonal communications, you get smoother, more relaxed and confident with each one. Great job Mark.

On the subject, I couldn't help but notice, but Mark was greatly improved in his expression from the last time I heard him speak on the issue.

Yes ...those few sessions I had with you got me going. I never did debating at school, so I've had to learn the basics. I'm learning that what I say doesn't necessarily have to be "perfect," it just needs to be said with conviction and not too slowly, or you lose people's attention.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 03:48 PM
RE: Just had my first public debate, with pastor Phil Fernandes
I will watch in its entirety as soon as I get a chance.
Never heard of the other guy.....
Congrats on opting for an open debateYes.............dogma destroys dialogue.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mr Woof's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: