(Mostly) Open call for discussion
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-03-2016, 12:29 AM
(Mostly) Open call for discussion
It's been a few years since I last did this, but I'm putting out a (mostly) open call for one-on-one discussion on (almost) any subject related to religion.

The last time I did this was a discussion with Heywood on the subject of abortion. In the spirit of variety, I am excluding both Heywood and the subject of abortion from this invitation. Furthermore, because of his chronically dishonest tactics, I will not engage Q in this format. Finally, I claim no particular expertise in any subject save mathematics, and thus would prefer to avoid discussing fields that are not readily open to the layperson (exempli gratia: the fine minutia of Biblical authorship).

This invitation is open to anyone else, on any other topic related to religion... provided, of course, it's something we disagree on.

I'd like to keep the format relaxed, the tone civil, and the discussion focused on a mutual arrival at the truth. I'll probably accept the first person to respond to this thread with an interesting subject (you pick), but if there are multiple respondents when I might take whoever has the more compelling subject.

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
19-03-2016, 10:52 AM (This post was last modified: 19-03-2016 12:15 PM by DLJ.)
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
OK.

Topic: "All models are wrong but some are useful".

Until secular societies can provide consistently equivalent or superior systemic and proceduralised mechanisms to fully support the needs of communities, religions will continue to exist as necessary and useful societal enablers.

Girl_nails

Find all posts by this user
19-03-2016, 06:38 PM
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
Hmm.

I agree with "all models are wrong but some are useful". But I disagree that the continued existence of religions is tied to their necessity and usefulness in society, and also disagree that there is a lack of viable alternatives. I don't know if that's enough of fodder for a discussion there.
Find all posts by this user
19-03-2016, 06:44 PM
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
Sounds like DLJ is answering the call. Smile


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
19-03-2016, 06:46 PM
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
I am fairly new here and do not entirely understand the format. Is this just a 2 person duel? And you yu necessarily taking the no such thing as religion stance? I would like to discuss that if we have to have religion around why not adapt a more benign one such as Dudeism? There has to be a religion that is not blood based where one drinks the blood of their god and eats His body.
Find all posts by this user
19-03-2016, 07:25 PM
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
(19-03-2016 06:46 PM)DerFish Wrote:  I am fairly new here and do not entirely understand the format. Is this just a 2 person duel? And you yu necessarily taking the no such thing as religion stance? I would like to discuss that if we have to have religion around why not adapt a more benign one such as Dudeism? There has to be a religion that is not blood based where one drinks the blood of their god and eats His body.

1-on-1 format once someone comes up with a topic that's good fodder for discussion (and I don't think we've gotten there yet). "Duel" might end up being too strong a term. I'm looking for an opposing opinion, though, so I guess "duel" is a decent enough descriptor.

I definitely think that religions exist, unless you want to get down into sine nitty-gritty semantic sense of existence on the level of "there's no such thing as people, they're just clouds of quarks". But in everyday language, yeah, religions do exist.

I'd question picking religions based on how benign they are, rather than how true they are, but all other things being equal I'd prefer benign to not-benign.
Find all posts by this user
21-03-2016, 09:07 PM (This post was last modified: 21-03-2016 09:18 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
Choose one:

Objectively speaking:

Morality is an illusion.
The self is an illusion
Time is an illusion
Proof is an illusion

I am not absolutely certain if these statements are true but I would like to argue on behalf of them, it that's ok with you?
Find all posts by this user
21-03-2016, 09:16 PM (This post was last modified: 21-03-2016 09:26 PM by Aliza.)
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
(19-03-2016 07:25 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  
(19-03-2016 06:46 PM)DerFish Wrote:  I am fairly new here and do not entirely understand the format. Is this just a 2 person duel? And you yu necessarily taking the no such thing as religion stance? I would like to discuss that if we have to have religion around why not adapt a more benign one such as Dudeism? There has to be a religion that is not blood based where one drinks the blood of their god and eats His body.

1-on-1 format once someone comes up with a topic that's good fodder for discussion (and I don't think we've gotten there yet). "Duel" might end up being too strong a term. I'm looking for an opposing opinion, though, so I guess "duel" is a decent enough descriptor.

I definitely think that religions exist, unless you want to get down into sine nitty-gritty semantic sense of existence on the level of "there's no such thing as people, they're just clouds of quarks". But in everyday language, yeah, religions do exist.

I'd question picking religions based on how benign they are, rather than how true they are, but all other things being equal I'd prefer benign to not-benign.

I would love to have a conversation with you about why everything you think you know about Judaism is wrong. If the discussion is still open, that is, and you're still in the process of selecting your debate partner.

Post edit: I should add to this that if you have a yeshiva education, you probably know more than I do, so there would be no point in discussing. My offer stands, assuming you were not raised in orthodox Judaism. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Aliza's post
21-03-2016, 09:22 PM
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
(21-03-2016 09:16 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(19-03-2016 07:25 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  1-on-1 format once someone comes up with a topic that's good fodder for discussion (and I don't think we've gotten there yet). "Duel" might end up being too strong a term. I'm looking for an opposing opinion, though, so I guess "duel" is a decent enough descriptor.

I definitely think that religions exist, unless you want to get down into sine nitty-gritty semantic sense of existence on the level of "there's no such thing as people, they're just clouds of quarks". But in everyday language, yeah, religions do exist.

I'd question picking religions based on how benign they are, rather than how true they are, but all other things being equal I'd prefer benign to not-benign.

I would love to have a conversation with you about why everything you think you know about Judaism is wrong. If the discussion is still open, that is, and you're still in the process of selecting your debate partner.
I would be glad to accept this offer.
Sorry for hijacking one of your potential opponents by the way. I'm running out of smart people to talk to on these forums.
Find all posts by this user
21-03-2016, 09:27 PM
RE: (Mostly) Open call for discussion
(21-03-2016 09:07 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  The self is an illusion
Time is an illusion

I usually attempt to avoid making image posts, but there is a physical limit to how much amused disdain I can express via alphanumeric characters. So, in the circumstances...

[Image: Rarity-With-Wings-rarity-the-unicorn-221...50-930.jpg]

Please, please do. Hell, I will personally take you up on either.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: