Does debating accomplish anything?

[BikerDude]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxsQvrHPKCg&feature=relmfu

[NinthDude]

hehe I listend 18 minutes so far and think it has potentional to listen further and I will do it later today ! Pretty good !

[BikerDude]

And another one. Facepalm moments.
Statements made by the faithful that make you just put your face in the palm of your hand and sigh.

Fundamentalist asks "so then how did all the dinosaurs die?"
Scheptic replies "many scientists believe that a large meteor hit the earth and killed them"
Fundamentalist laughs and says "that's ridiculous. How could one meteor hit all the dinosaurs?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iyCDXF6lLI&feature=relmfu

[meekon5]

Only if there's a lot of you debating at the same time (en-mass).



I'm sorry I couldn't help myself.

[Hominid]

Usually it's the better debater that wins, not the one who is right. Or, they can both be wrong. I like lively discussion just like the next guy, but I've never been swayed by an argument or debate itself, so maybe we just like to hear ourselves talk.   

David Suzuki said one time to someone he was debating with on the radio "I talk to explain what I'm thinking, you talk to find out what it is you're thinking."  Going below the belt does less good for your stance than gentle persuasion by example...

[milnie]

Quote H "Usually it's the better debater that wins, not the one who is right."

so your saying the best is a master debator? :>

[Hominid]

Quote H "Usually it's the better debater that wins, not the one who is right."

so your saying the best is a master debator? :>

Yep, I can vouch...

[BikerDude]

I think in the context of Religious debate the question more means "Does rehashing the same nonsense over and over accomplish anything?"

The point being that no one ever "wins".
Debating the existence of ghosts for instance leads no where.
By definition one side of the debate IS irrational so the debate always devolves into, at best an exercise in hair splitting non sense that inevitably does nothing to fullfill the burden of proof.
Or not...

[Hominid]

I think in the context of Religious debate the question more means "Does rehashing the same nonsense over and over accomplish anything?"

The point being that no one ever "wins".
Debating the existence of ghosts for instance leads no where.
By definition one side of the debate IS irrational so the debate always devolves into, at best an exercise in hair splitting non sense that inevitably does nothing to fullfill the burden of proof.
Or not...

You're right.  You and I had a great discussion about creative design, and I basically closed by saying that the foundational truths that form our world view are either incomplete, or viewed prejudicially because of personal predispositions.  The more complex the subject, the less likely you'll find total agreement. Religion, politics, philosophy, the list goes on. That's why I say "May the best debater win" - and they will.

[cckeiser]

Of course...everything below is just like my opinion dudes!

From Poly-Solipsism:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/118067270898779712769/posts

"I think"

We...the human species, can and have argued ad infinitum over what we each think, with little to no consensus on just about anything. The history of human discourse gives testament to our solipsism. The fact that after 5000 years of searching for "The Truth" and there still is not a single point not in contention, attests to the elemental flaw in our endeavors.
Fundamentally we are all Solipsist within our own minds, and what we perceive to be The Truth we then assume must be The Truth for all. It is our own solipsism that has each of us trapped within our own minds creating our own Reality and blinding us to the essence of what The Truth really is. We assume the other creatures we perceive populating our Universe are part of our own Reality and therefore must also share in the truth that we ourselves perceive. We are then befuddled and outraged when others contest our perceptions of truth and Reality.
We cluster in cliques of entangled perceptions and wage war on those who would dare challenge our convictions. We not only think we are right; we know we are right.
So does the other guy.

There will never be Peace on Earth and Good Will to all Creatures until we accept the inescapable conclusion we each exists in our own observer created Reality, and no two minds have the very same perspective, and therefore cannot have the very same perceptions of Reality.
We are fundamentally solipsist in our own minds and create our own Reality to exist in.
What one mind see as fact, another mind may see as fiction.

Reality is not only malleable, it is fundamentally interactive. It conforms to our expectations and our anxieties.
We cannot say one part of Reality is malleable and another part is not. We cannot exclude any part of Reality from being manipulate by our apprehensions.
Reality is Information processed by an Observer.
You are the Observer for your own Reality.

[Hominid]

Of course...everything below is just like my opinion dudes!

From Poly-Solipsism:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/118067270898779712769/posts

"I think"

We...the human species, can and have argued ad infinitum over what we each think, with little to no consensus on just about anything. The history of human discourse gives testament to our solipsism. The fact that after 5000 years of searching for "The Truth" and there still is not a single point not in contention, attests to the elemental flaw in our endeavors.
Fundamentally we are all Solipsist within our own minds, and what we perceive to be The Truth we then assume must be The Truth for all. It is our own solipsism that has each of us trapped within our own minds creating our own Reality and blinding us to the essence of what The Truth really is. We assume the other creatures we perceive populating our Universe are part of our own Reality and therefore must also share in the truth that we ourselves perceive. We are then befuddled and outraged when others contest our perceptions of truth and Reality.
We cluster in cliques of entangled perceptions and wage war on those who would dare challenge our convictions. We not only think we are right; we know we are right.
So does the other guy.

There will never be Peace on Earth and Good Will to all Creatures until we accept the inescapable conclusion we each exists in our own observer created Reality, and no two minds have the very same perspective, and therefore cannot have the very same perceptions of Reality.
We are fundamentally solipsist in our own minds and create our own Reality to exist in.
What one mind see as fact, another mind may see as fiction.

Reality is not only malleable, it is fundamentally interactive. It conforms to our expectations and our anxieties.
We cannot say one part of Reality is malleable and another part is not. We cannot exclude any part of Reality from being manipulate by our apprehensions.
Reality is Information processed by an Observer.
You are the Observer for your own Reality.

You said it far more eloquently than I ever could have. May I have permission to quote you? Specifically:

Reality is Information processed by an Observer.

Love it...

[cckeiser]

You said it far more eloquently than I ever could have. May I have permission to quote you? Specifically:

Reality is Information processed by an Observer.

Love it...

Of course! I would be honored...

[DigitalBuddha]

You said it far more eloquently than I ever could have. May I have permission to quote you? Specifically:

Reality is Information processed by an Observer.

Love it...

Of course! I would be honored...

Coitus?

[Hominid]

You said it far more eloquently than I ever could have. May I have permission to quote you? Specifically:

Reality is Information processed by an Observer.

Love it...

Of course! I would be honored...

Familiar with Ervin Laszlo's "Science and the Akashic Field"?  A good read...  Your google post enthralled me BTW.

[Hominid]

Coitus?

VAGINA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!