Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 4/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Thread for sorting out confusion
Sleeping Dragon
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 4 (112044)
06-01-2004 11:39 AM


To all:
I propose a thread which allows debaters and forum members to voice their concerns over:
1) Members making generalised and unsupported claims. (Like: "The bible has proof that it is the word of God. What evidence? It's obvious!")
2) Members making vague or seemingly irrelevant points while refusing to explain them (or explain them in an even more vague and irrelevant fashion)
3) Members leaving a thread in the middle of a discussion. (If members cannot make a refutation for a point made, they can: a) agree with their opponent's point of view, b) agree to disagree, c) continue to discuss, or d) apologise for their error. Under no circumstances should a member leave the discussion as a result of embarassment at having no refutation for the opponent's arguments. I consider this rude.)
(Note: this doesn't apply for members who are preoccupied with "getting a life". I think it is common courtesy (and many members have done this) to inform your opponent(s) that you would be away or busy in the future, and so would be unable to reply for a period of time.)
(Note also: this doesn't apply to "newbies" because according to one source, they (apparently) tend to come and go as they please. So if your opponent left and never came back, forget it)
4) Members selectively ignoring points. (If you have given a refutation against point A, your refutation gets ignored, and then several posts later your opponent brings up point A again and asserts that you have not refuted it. Repeat n times.)
*******************************************************************
If any of the above has happened to you (or is happening to you), I suggest you copy and paste your unanswered questions, ignored points, or some evidence that your opponent is around (e.g. arguing in another forum/thread) but vanished from your discussion, to this thread, and then NOTIFY YOU OPPONENT THAT YOU HAVE DONE SO (very important).
If you are the individual accused of the above practices, but you believe you have a legitimate reason (e.g. posts too complex for points to be identified, points were accidentally overlooked, communication problems, time constraints, claim made was legitimate but to explain it would be off-topic, etc.) then you may explain yourself here.
I don't intend this to be a long term thread for off-topic dicussion. Once the confusion has been sorted out, you and your opponenet may wish to return to your earlier thread to argue on the original topic. This thread is intended for sorting out confusion (as well as identifying shameful debating practices).

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by mike the wiz, posted 06-01-2004 12:06 PM Sleeping Dragon has replied
 Message 3 by Wounded King, posted 06-03-2004 7:39 AM Sleeping Dragon has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4755
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 2 of 4 (112050)
06-01-2004 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Sleeping Dragon
06-01-2004 11:39 AM


I want to apologize for not answering your post in the "power of prayer and divine plans". I have the feeling I was the primary source of your agitation. The posts over there are quite long, and so I choose to make a time ready so I am able to respond. I am not the sole user at this station ans my time can be intermitent. So I will try to find time to respond within the next few days, and give an answer you deserve. As you can see, I have answered your posts in other threads. So, it's not that I am avoiding you, though it might have seemed that way.
As for being vague - I am naturally vague.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Sleeping Dragon, posted 06-01-2004 11:39 AM Sleeping Dragon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Sleeping Dragon, posted 06-07-2004 12:48 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 3 of 4 (112584)
06-03-2004 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Sleeping Dragon
06-01-2004 11:39 AM


I'm not sure this would be a good precedent to set, I fear Syamsu would have to have an entire thread all to himself on these issues. Apologies for the unneccessary ad hom attack, but at least I'm not putting it in to my actual debate with him.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Sleeping Dragon, posted 06-01-2004 11:39 AM Sleeping Dragon has not replied

  
Sleeping Dragon
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 4 (113127)
06-07-2004 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by mike the wiz
06-01-2004 12:06 PM


To mike_the_wiz:
Thank you for your reply.
All forms of vagueness I can endure, as long as I am convinced that you are not delibrately feigning ignorance or "making shit up" (MSU).
If you want short posts, we can break the ideas down to small chunks, even one question a day is fine by me. BUT I would expect you to read over every post and remember the points I have made (and in return, I will do the same for your posts and points).
I haven't read every posts of yours in every other thread, but regarding the "power of prayer and divine plans" thread, I have read every one. You have not answered many of my questions (note, the list of loose ends that were left un-tied is phenomenal).
Time constraints, I can understand. So let's start with simplicity. I will copy and paste my simple question in "power of prayer and divine plans":
Consider if God is a chemical engineer:
God made chemical A.
God made chemical B.
God knows that, if he mixes the two chemicals A and B, an explosion will occur.
God mixes the chemicals.
The expected explosion occured.
Please tell me who/what is responsible for the occurence of the explosion:
A) Chemical A.
B) Chemical B.
C) Chemical C.
D) God.
Note that this is in no way a trick question. This question defines the way I perceive the Christian perspective.
Awaiting your next reply.

"Respect is like money, it can only be earned. When it is given, it becomes pittance"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by mike the wiz, posted 06-01-2004 12:06 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024