TruthMapping.com

At EvC Forum we're always looking for ways we can improve the quality of the debate. I just received this email: I don't have time to check this out myself right now, so if anyone finds some good ideas there, let us know!

I just glanced at it and I could be a bit biased, but my take on it is that we ourselves define our ideas through interaction. We really do not need someone to define our ideas for us, now DO we? Add by edit: I registered with them and will try them out. I don't see them as connected to us here, however. Lets form a consensus on it, if the issue is relevant. Maybe Ben will have an idea or two.One further observation: They are a Dot Com, so they are in it for more than pleasent chat analysis...money is involved at some level.This message has been edited by Phat, 10-09-2005 09:29 AM

the site biased or the people on it?seems interesting to me, like all I need is another site ...

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

I have yet to use this site on a regular basis. When I do, I will form an opinion as to bias or not.This message has been edited by Phat, 10-10-2005 08:13 AM

Maybe, maybe not. My website is a Dot Com and it hasn't made me a penny...as it says on their website:

quote:

---

This site is entirely a volunteer effort. Please consider assisting us in elevating debate with a donation via PayPal. Thank you.

---

I've posted a couple of items there now (and linked to it on another board). Interesting format in that it forces you to break down your argument into segments.My main impression so far is that most posters do not have any kind of {training\education\understanding} of the logical process at all and make numerous (avoidable) errors. I can see several people here having a field day with some of the posts (Annafan, Parasomnium, Holmes, etc) as a result.I wonder if something like this could be incorporated into a new forum {Logic Please?} that could be used to show people the failings in their thought processes (a moderated bootcamp with a purpose?). But it might be easier to just use this site.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Yup It would be better if there was a training level or two. Where there preset examples that only allowed you to agree or disagree and then told you the correct response and why. (ie explained that it was valid and why, or a straw man and why, or BtQ and why) then with clear cut considered examples of the errors people could then learn to form more concise logical argument construction.As for Us I’m not sure it would be all that use full as such a formal ridged structure would seem stifling. That and our Mods and participants do a good job of limiting digressions and pointing out logical errors.If I was to take anything from this then adding an ”Agree’,'Nutral' ”Disagree’ buttons to each post (next to reply, Peek) might be interesting . When each person views a post for the first time a neutral vote is added to the post’s agreement factor, by default. Then if the viewer wished to indicate a strong agreement or disagreement with the statement they click the appropriate button, changing their vote from the neutral default to their choice. The viewer could change their vote any time .The post would also display an agreement meter that would display the swing either way from neutral the number of views and the numbers for against and neutral.This would allow people to give certain comments the thumbs up or down without needing to post, and also allow everyone to see the board’s overall feelings on the thread.This could be expanded to users and they could have a agreement value based on the total agreement values of all their posts.Needs work and polish but worth a bit of thought I think.

Each of us has a rather different approach to assimilation and processing of information. Maybe I agree with you in an obtuse sort of way, or maybe in general I do not. What do you think?I am uninterested in your posts, as you also probably are uninterested in mine. We do find common ground in philosophy in general, however. After I use truthmapping.com a bit, maybe I will get back to you.You are free to teach me logic anytime you so desire. May make for an interesting topic!