Frenemies of TalkRational:
Nontheist Nexus |  Rants'n'Raves |  Secular Cafe |  Council of Ex-Muslims |  The Skeptical Zone |  rationalia |  Rational Skepticism |  Atheists Today | 
TalkRational Archive  

FAQ Rules Staff List Calendar RSS
Go Back   TalkRational Archive > The Rat Ring > Rat Ring Proposals

Notices

Rat Ring Proposals Propose formal debates/discussions and discuss terms.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-19-2015, 11:33 PM   #2563902  /  #26
Lion IRC
Senior Member
 
Lion IRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,750
Lion IRC
Default

Democracy. What a bummer.
Lion IRC is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 12:06 AM   #2563908  /  #27
Testycalibrated
incredibad
Age Of War Normal Champion
 
Testycalibrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: commensurate
Posts: 10,784
Testycalibrated
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I am fine with the conditions. When do you want to start? Also, admins, can I get mod powers in the debate forum to move errant posts to the peanut gallery?
You can't Mod your own debate thread.
I don't think there's really any reason not to. I just want to be able to move any non debate posts out of the thread. If it seems wrong, no problem.
__________________
I never met a man I didn't like.
-Will Rogers
Quote:
Sen. McCaskill: "It Is Unacceptable For Anybody To Refer To Hillary Clinton As A Corporate Whore"
Testycalibrated is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 12:07 AM   #2563909  /  #28
Testycalibrated
incredibad
Age Of War Normal Champion
 
Testycalibrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: commensurate
Posts: 10,784
Testycalibrated
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buttershug View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
Gods (probably) exists vs. God (probably) does not exist.
That could work if we ever find a theist that can understand probability.
I am fine with the conditions.
__________________
I never met a man I didn't like.
-Will Rogers
Quote:
Sen. McCaskill: "It Is Unacceptable For Anybody To Refer To Hillary Clinton As A Corporate Whore"
Testycalibrated is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 12:17 AM   #2563911  /  #29
punkforchrist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 103
punkforchrist
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Also,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?
I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?
This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.
punkforchrist is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 12:32 AM   #2563916  /  #30
Testycalibrated
incredibad
Age Of War Normal Champion
 
Testycalibrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: commensurate
Posts: 10,784
Testycalibrated
Default

Sounds good.
__________________
I never met a man I didn't like.
-Will Rogers
Quote:
Sen. McCaskill: "It Is Unacceptable For Anybody To Refer To Hillary Clinton As A Corporate Whore"
Testycalibrated is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 12:40 AM   #2563920  /  #31
woof
-
 
woof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,329
woof
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Also,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?
I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?
This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.
Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.
woof is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 12:47 AM   #2563924  /  #32
punkforchrist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 103
punkforchrist
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Sounds good.
Care to start on Thursday? We can take a week between posts. Does that work for you? By the way, much of my opening statement I've already stated, but not all of it. Is that okay?
punkforchrist is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 12:48 AM   #2563925  /  #33
punkforchrist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 103
punkforchrist
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woof View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Also,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?
I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?
This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.
Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.
It's funny that you're trying to get under my skin. Good luck.
punkforchrist is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 01:04 AM   #2563933  /  #34
punkforchrist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 103
punkforchrist
Default

Testy, would you be okay if we changed the number of the rounds? I'm thinking:

Opening statement: 2,000 words
First rebuttal: 1,000 words
Second rebuttal: 1,000 words
Conclusion: 750 words
punkforchrist is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 03:20 AM   #2563995  /  #35
OHSU
Senior Member
 
OHSU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,265
OHSU
Default

There is no evidence for any god. (Evidence is a body of facts that is exclusively concordant with and thus supportive of that one conclusion over any other.)

When there is no evidence for something, there is no reason to believe in it, which is a pretty good reason not to believe in it.
__________________
I think that probably [aquatic apes] were about aquatic to the same degree as an otter. So, they would spend large amounts of time in the water but come ashore to sleep and to breed. -- Elaine Morgan
OHSU is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 04:48 AM   #2563998  /  #36
woof
-
 
woof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,329
woof
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by woof View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Also,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?
I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?
This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.
Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.
It's funny that you're trying to get under my skin. Good luck.
Not trying to get under your skin, or anybody else's. I am just mentioning the rules of discourse.
Pontification is not a route to knowledge, merely self-delusion and the hope of deluding others. That is what apologists like Thomas Aquinas & Bishop Anselm did.
Any sincere debate, any sincere quest for knowledge will deliberately try to minimize assumptions, examine all available data and argument, and conduct honest testing of ideas.
God exists therefore...wank, wank, wank.....is not discourse, it is pseudo-intellectual masturbation. HTH.
woof is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 05:02 AM   #2564000  /  #37
Testycalibrated
incredibad
Age Of War Normal Champion
 
Testycalibrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: commensurate
Posts: 10,784
Testycalibrated
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Testy, would you be okay if we changed the number of the rounds? I'm thinking:

Opening statement: 2,000 words
First rebuttal: 1,000 words
Second rebuttal: 1,000 words
Conclusion: 750 words
Sure. I'll probably use almost all the words allowed no matter how long.
__________________
I never met a man I didn't like.
-Will Rogers
Quote:
Sen. McCaskill: "It Is Unacceptable For Anybody To Refer To Hillary Clinton As A Corporate Whore"
Testycalibrated is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 05:06 AM   #2564002  /  #38
Testycalibrated
incredibad
Age Of War Normal Champion
 
Testycalibrated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: commensurate
Posts: 10,784
Testycalibrated
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Sounds good.
Care to start on Thursday? We can take a week between posts. Does that work for you? By the way, much of my opening statement I've already stated, but not all of it. Is that okay?
That sounds good. I'm not sure how I will address the topic yet so go ahead and make the case you want to make. I'll address the topic on whatever terms work for you.

And, woof, aqua-arse? What are you, three?
__________________
I never met a man I didn't like.
-Will Rogers
Quote:
Sen. McCaskill: "It Is Unacceptable For Anybody To Refer To Hillary Clinton As A Corporate Whore"
Testycalibrated is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 08:52 AM   #2564014  /  #39
Lion IRC
Senior Member
 
Lion IRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,750
Lion IRC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woof View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Also,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?
I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?
This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.
Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.
woof! RELAX.
He is doing his opponent a favor.
Better they should both - for the sake of the argument/debate - agree in advance on some presuppositions about the nature of the divine entity being discussed. PFC is stating the bleeding obvious that it should be presupposed that if/since God exists, then evidence of same would presumably involve at least some intervention (theophany).
Lion IRC is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 01:13 PM   #2564056  /  #40
buttershug
Hung
Zaptonia Defense Champion, Summer Sports Match Champion, Attack Of The Fan Girls Champion, Budapest Defenders Champion, When Penguins Attack TD Champion, Flash RPG Tower Defense Champion
 
buttershug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 26,430
buttershug
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by woof View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Also,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?
I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?
This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.
Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.
woof! RELAX.
He is doing his opponent a favor.
Better they should both - for the sake of the argument/debate - agree in advance on some presuppositions about the nature of the divine entity being discussed. PFC is stating the bleeding obvious that it should be presupposed that if/since God exists, then evidence of same would presumably involve at least some intervention (theophany).
But one can only conclude God with pre-suppositions.
If you want Truth then you don't pre-suppose.
If you want God then you must pre-suppose.
__________________
Quote:
Only the madman is absolutely sure.

Robert Anton Wilson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3YQ24i1wP0
buttershug is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 02:39 PM   #2564093  /  #41
woof
-
 
woof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,329
woof
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Sounds good.
Care to start on Thursday? We can take a week between posts. Does that work for you? By the way, much of my opening statement I've already stated, but not all of it. Is that okay?
That sounds good. I'm not sure how I will address the topic yet so go ahead and make the case you want to make. I'll address the topic on whatever terms work for you.

And, woof, aqua-arse? What are you, three?
Aquinas was a murdering son-of-a-bitch who tortured and killed who knows how many "heretics", and all the while imagined himself to be some sort of saint. Catholics to this day worship him as if he was the alpha and omega of intellect and humanity. I see him as no better than Himmler. He was a butcher. He deserves no respect.
woof is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 02:45 PM   #2564096  /  #42
borealis
cruel but fair
Admin
 
borealis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 27,030
borealis
Default

Guys I haven't messed with it ever, but isn't the Rat ring set up so that only the debating pair can post itt?
__________________
“What is important is to spread confusion, not eliminate it.”
― Salvador Dalí
borealis is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 04:52 PM   #2564126  /  #43
SMS
I'm a Sexy and BadAss Catholic
 
SMS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: blowmevillle
Posts: 10,351
SMS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woof View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by woof View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Also,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?
I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?
This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.
Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.
It's funny that you're trying to get under my skin. Good luck.
Not trying to get under your skin, or anybody else's. I am just mentioning the rules of discourse.
Pontification is not a route to knowledge, merely self-delusion and the hope of deluding others. That is what apologists like Thomas Aquinas & Bishop Anselm did.
Any sincere debate, any sincere quest for knowledge will deliberately try to minimize assumptions, examine all available data and argument, and conduct honest testing of ideas.
God exists therefore...wank, wank, wank.....is not discourse, it is pseudo-intellectual masturbation. HTH.
There is no argument offered by Aquinas for the existence of God that begins with the idea that God exists and infers stuff from it.
__________________
Atheists are stupid.
SMS is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 04:56 PM   #2564127  /  #44
ToThePoint
search & destroy
 
ToThePoint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: World.Wide.Web Global >•< Mercenary
Posts: 8,695
ToThePoint
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by borealis View Post
Guys I haven't messed with it ever, but isn't the Rat ring set up so that only the debating pair can post itt?
Yes of course, only the 2 debate participants post in the debate thread.

A separate Peanut Gallery thread is started for anyone else to chime in.
__________________
"I did it 35 minutes ago."
ToThePoint is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 04:57 PM   #2564129  /  #45
punkforchrist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 103
punkforchrist
Default

It's probably best not to reply to woof if he's going to behave like that. We have to pick our battles. And, I'm sure he'll say something snarky to me next.
punkforchrist is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 04:58 PM   #2564131  /  #46
punkforchrist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 103
punkforchrist
Default

Testy, we're starting on Thursday, right?
punkforchrist is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 05:04 PM   #2564135  /  #47
SMS
I'm a Sexy and BadAss Catholic
 
SMS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: blowmevillle
Posts: 10,351
SMS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by woof View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkforchrist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
Also,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testycalibrated View Post
I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?
I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?
This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.
Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.
woof! RELAX.
He is doing his opponent a favor.
Better they should both - for the sake of the argument/debate - agree in advance on some presuppositions about the nature of the divine entity being discussed. PFC is stating the bleeding obvious that it should be presupposed that if/since God exists, then evidence of same would presumably involve at least some intervention (theophany).

No, not exactly. PFC might have spoke unclearly here.

If this argument is the first way, then God's existence will be argued as a causal precondition for there being any change at all, that for any change, God's existence is a necessary, causal precondition for such change to exist and subsist moment from moment. Thus, from the premise that there is change, as PFC will argue it, we can deduce God's existence and some sort of causal interaction with that change. Does God "interact" with the world according to this argument? Yes, in a sense, but He is more like a flute player who blows into the flute, keeping the music going from moment to moment than interacting in it in a way like you or me. This is not to say that God couldnt interact in it in such a way, but only that the argument doesn't aim to show that.

In any case, there is no need to presume that if God exists, then he interacts with the world. It will be shown that if there is any change at all, and there is, then God is keeps that change going, which implies a sort of interaction.
__________________
Atheists are stupid.
SMS is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 08:25 PM   #2564168  /  #48
punkforchrist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 103
punkforchrist
Default

Right, the First Way isn't the kalam argument. This isn't about originating causation, but about sustaining causation. It's like the difference between the crew that builds a house and the foundation that sustains it.
punkforchrist is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 08:30 PM   #2564169  /  #49
punkforchrist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 103
punkforchrist
Default

Maybe a better analogy for the First Way is a spring that keeps the gears of a watch moving. By the way, the First Way is about change in general, and not just movement from one location to another.
punkforchrist is offline   topbottom
Old 09-20-2015, 08:48 PM   #2564172  /  #50
Lion IRC
Senior Member
 
Lion IRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,750
Lion IRC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buttershug View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
Gods (probably) exists vs. God (probably) does not exist.
That could work if we ever find a theist that can understand probability.
You mean someone like Kurt Gödel or Thomas Bayes?
Lion IRC is offline   topbottom
 

  TalkRational Archive > The Rat Ring > Rat Ring Proposals

Tags
lie_on_eye_arse_c, loin_irk, loony_irk, lying irk again, shut up woof

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2008 - 2018, TalkRational.org