Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
freediver is a Jehovah's Witness (Read 13810 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #30 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 2:10pm
 
you staunchly refuse to accept other parties may be right to a degree at least

Saying someone is partially right is just an excuse for not being able to demonstrate why they are completely wrong.

you will argue and change your arguments in subtle ways just to keep the debate raging

No, to make the argument better. Your first attempt at expressing yourself is always a bit clumsy.

When you encounter a strong point that goes against your view, you refuse to acknowledge it

Wrong, the stronger the point, the more effort I make to counter it.

selecting some weaker and less relevant phrase and attacking it, diverting the debate

You obviously start by attacking the weakest point in your oponents argument. Your opponent then modifies their argumnent so it doesn't rely on such weak points. That's jsut how it works.

I will frequently bend to superior arguments and concede that indeed my opponent has a valid point

I am not wrong very often. Remember that a lot of the big issues you see here I have been debating for a long time in various circles. I wouldn't be pushing something if it had big holes in it. It would be too easy for someone like you to just follow me and just point it out repeatedly.

the tactics of argument for arguments sake are usually discarded when we grow up

The tactics of argument for arguments sake are no different to the ones used when an argument has a purpose. That is why students do practice debates. Not to waste their time, but to build the skills they will need later in life.

It is possible to accept that someone is making a strong argument, and simply disagree, it shows strength in character to be able to admit to the weaknesses in your own arguments.

No it doesn't. It shows that you are too lazy to get to the bottom of the disagreement. It usually comes down to a difference in competing values, in which case there isn't much more to do - you can't go attacking someone's set of values, or in the evolution case in definition, in which case you argue the various merits of the definitions. The idea that people should agree to disagree is inidicative of the shallowness of many online debates, where people simply give up if they can't easily resolve a disagreement.

Politics online:

http://ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1176680937

The truth is you pissed me off freediver and not our ideas.

My skill at promoting them pissed you off. But that was not my intention. The same skills that pissed you off were the ones that got you to initially concede I was right.

Also, remember that focussing on whether your opponent agrees with you on anything kind of misses the point. You both learn something, you both improve your ability to communicate your views, both in general and the particular views being discussed. Most importantly, any audience will make up their own mind, and are usually fairly good at ignoring the unimportant things like who agrees with what.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
sense(Guest)
Guest


Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #31 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 2:20pm
 
I agree with freediver that forums are better if we stay anonymous and withhold information about ourselves.
However, I've pushed at freediver on the religious aspects for a very simple and fundamental reason. I noticed the evolution and christianity articles when I first came across this site. I quickly formed the idea that the site has been established with the SOLE purpose of spreading some christian doctrine/dogma/church. I formed the view that the various forums were just hooks. If it is a religious site then that should be revealed. It's not illegal. If it is a religious site then it would be wrong to pretend that it isn't.
I still think it's main purpose is religious. The evolution is not science argument is only ever supported by the religious.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
zoso
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 512
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #32 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 2:21pm
 
You see, you just confirmed everything I have said about you in every response you have here. You are arrogant and ignorant. The world is not full of absolutes, in fact there is no such thing. There is weakness in all arguments, accepting this is a matter of maturity, it does not amount to 'giving up' or lazyness.

Freediver your skill in argument has much to be desired, clearly you are hot headed and arrogant, you refuse to back down in the face of any criticism by your own admission, this is not skill, anyone can do this. The bigger man can always accept when he is wrong. I never admitted you were right, I conceded that you bested me in debate, and that I could not add to my argument without first increasing my knowledge, when I did this and came back to you with scientific evidence contrary to your opinion, you simply dismissed it is irrelevant, then set out to make me look the fool, no matter how subtly you went about it, that was your intention.

Quote:
Also, remember that focussing on whether your opponent agrees with you on anything kind of misses the point.

Democratic systems are about finding the middle ground, focusing on where you agree with your oponent is the most important part of finding that middle ground.

Quote:
You both learn something, you both improve your ability to communicate your views, both in general and the particular views being discussed.

Only by respecting one another and accepting that both views are correct from their respective positions. Everything is true when taken from the right point of view, read some of Gandhi's writings on the definition of truth, he claims it is a relative thing, and this is what I believe.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #33 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 3:16pm
 
The evolution is not science argument is only ever supported by the religious.

I have not seen anyone else support it, except in agreeing with me when I have said it. Even the similar statements made by the pope were not saying it was unscientific.

you refuse to back down in the face of any criticism by your own admission, this is not skill, anyone can do this

It's not that I refuse to, it's that there is no need to.

when I did this and came back to you with scientific evidence contrary to your opinion, you simply dismissed it is irrelevant

No I didn't. I explained why it was irrelevant.

then set out to make me look the fool, no matter how subtly you went about it, that was your intention

Do not claim to know my intention. That is how you end up looking the fool.

Democratic systems are about finding the middle ground, focusing on where you agree with your oponent is the most important part of finding that middle ground.

This is not a vote, this is deliberation. Democracy is not actually all about compromise. It is actually about the will of the majority overriding the will of the minority.

Only by respecting one another and accepting that both views are correct from their respective positions.

I respect you. However, you do not have to accept that your opponents argument is internally consistent. Pointing out those inconsistencies is often the easiest way to show that they are wrong.

Everything is true when taken from the right point of view, read some of Gandhi's writings on the definition of truth, he claims it is a relative thing, and this is what I believe.

If someone contradicts themselves they are wrong, regardless of their point of view.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
zoso
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 512
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #34 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 3:27pm
 
Quote:
I have not seen anyone else support it, except in agreeing with me when I have said it. Even the similar statements made by the pope were not saying it was unscientific.

I have found sources that make more or less the exact same argument as you do, they are pretty much only religious in nature. You are only making a case by redefining science into your own terms, ones that nobody else accepts, because otherwise scientists would agree with you.

Quote:
you refuse to back down in the face of any criticism by your own admission, this is not skill, anyone can do this

It's not that I refuse to, it's that there is no need to.

Ahh, my point exactly Grin

It is not possible for you to be able to see that you are doing it, because that would entail an admission that you are wrong in the first place.

Quote:
No I didn't. I explained why it was irrelevant.

Bullsh!t you did, did you even read the links I posted?

Quote:
I respect you. However, you do not have to accept that your opponents argument is internally consistent. Pointing out those inconsistencies is often the easiest way to show that they are wrong.

Making an argument that ultimately changes a persons view on their beliefs entails changing the frame of reference from which they viewed their beliefs, this does not mean that under their previous point of view their belief was not true. Indeed by pointing out inconsistencies in peoples arguments you are only expanding their understanding, not changing the fact that with limited understanding their views are still truth. Nobody makes an inconsistent argument if they are aware of their inconsistencies, by pointing them out you are expanding and changing their viewpoint, this does not mean their inconsistent belief is not true in a mindset that cannot recognise the inconsistencies.

Quote:
If someone contradicts themselves they are wrong, regardless of their point of view.

Heh, you seem to think that if someone contradicts YOU they are wrong. Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #35 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 3:44pm
 
I have found sources that make more or less the exact same argument as you do, they are pretty much only religious in nature.

Please link to them. People have said that to me before, but it always turned out to be wrong in some fundamental way.

You are only making a case by redefining science into your own terms, ones that nobody else accepts, because otherwise scientists would agree with you.

Scientists do agree with me.

Bullsh!t you did, did you even read the links I posted?

No. I assumed that if they were indeed relevant, you would contradict me. Usually someone's inability to put the evidence into their own words is a strong indication that it doesn't exist or doesn't back up their case. You cannot expect people to read whatever you want them to read if you cannot explain how it is relevant or even quote a relevant part. That's what lawyers do to bury information.

Making an argument that ultimately changes a persons view on their beliefs entails changing the frame of reference from which they viewed their beliefs, this does not mean that under their previous point of view their belief was not true.

It means their frame of reference was wrong. Not all errors require a change in reference.

Indeed by pointing out inconsistencies in peoples arguments you are only expanding their understanding

Fine by me.

Heh, you seem to think that if someone contradicts YOU they are wrong.

I can only go by experience.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
zoso
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 512
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #36 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 3:53pm
 
freediver wrote on Apr 18th, 2007 at 3:44pm:
I have found sources that make more or less the exact same argument as you do, they are pretty much only religious in nature.

Please link to them. People have said that to me before, but it always turned out to be wrong in some fundamental way.

True, the particular article I am thinking of claimed that natural selection was not scientific either, so it is not strictly the same as your arguments.
Use google scholar or ebscohost to find them yourself you lazy bastard Wink

Quote:
You are only making a case by redefining science into your own terms, ones that nobody else accepts, because otherwise scientists would agree with you.

Scientists do agree with me.

Sources?

Quote:
Bullsh!t you did, did you even read the links I posted?

No. I assumed that if they were indeed relevant, you would contradict me. Usually someone's inability to put the evidence into their own words is a strong indication that it doesn't exist or doesn't back up their case. You cannot expect people to read whatever you want them to read if you cannot explain how it is relevant or even quote a relevant part. That's what lawyers do to bury information.

Ahh but I did, you claim no empirical study can exist to test evolution, I linked to and quoted a number of empirical studies that have tested and supported predictions of evolutionary theory. You simply dismissed them since "these cannot exist..." and didn't read my sources by your own admission.

Now are you really sure that you are going to say to me that you are perfectly right but unwilling to research the topic?

Quote:
Making an argument that ultimately changes a persons view on their beliefs entails changing the frame of reference from which they viewed their beliefs, this does not mean that under their previous point of view their belief was not true.

It means their frame of reference was wrong. Not all errors require a change in reference.

Not wrong, different, you need to drop your ideas of what is right, wrong, superior inferior and accept a neutral position.

Quote:
Heh, you seem to think that if someone contradicts YOU they are wrong.

I can only go by experience.

What was that I said about arrogance and ignorance?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #37 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 4:05pm
 
I linked to and quoted a number of empirical studies that have tested and supported predictions of evolutionary theory.

I explained how they were not a valid experimental test.

Now are you really sure that you are going to say to me that you are perfectly right but unwilling to research the topic?

I have researched the topic. I have been given thousands of hours of reading by people who disagree with me, but they couldn't explain how it proved me wrong. Many people tend to assume that if you would jsut read the same thing they have read you would agree with them, and when you don't they try to get you to read everything they have read. But that trivialises the issue. If you really could prove me wrong with those links, you wouldn't stil be arguing with me and you would have explained how they proved me wrong.

What was that I said about arrogance and ignorance?

Being right all the time does not necessarily mean you are arrogant.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
zoso
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 512
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #38 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 4:12pm
 
Quote:
If you really could prove me wrong with those links, you wouldn't stil be arguing with me and you would have explained how they proved me wrong.


This is why I have more or less dropped the subject, you are wrong, it just popped up again here while we were debating your 'skills'.

Quote:
Being right all the time does not necessarily mean you are arrogant.


When those words come from the horses mouth? Oh yes it does!

Grin Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Shadow Bear
New Member
*
Offline


That Loony Yid

Posts: 1
Sweden
Gender: male
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #39 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 7:41pm
 
Grin Score: Freediver 1, Zozo 0
Back to top
 

"if we start haggling with human rights we end up in a society where the only one having any human rights is the one who has deprived everybody else of theirs."
 
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #40 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 8:10pm
 
For Gods sake, who cares what religion freediver is?

There's more important thing to worry about.

For example: Islam and Multiculturalism and how to get rid of them.  Grin
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #41 - Apr 18th, 2007 at 8:30pm
 
I agree with DT - who cares?

Personally apart from a few christian threads a while ago, I have seen very little mention of religion that is until Sense brought the subject up AGAIN.  There appears to be nothng religious about Ozpolitics as it covers a wide range of subjects.

It looks like a personal attack on Freediver and it isn't warranted or justified.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sense(Guest)
Guest


Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #42 - Apr 19th, 2007 at 10:26am
 
mantra - just to put the record straight - the subject was revived by Zoso and Shithouse-Rat in big way long after I'd dropped it. I just rejoined to give them support. I'll not raise it again. In fact, I'd be happy for freediver to delete this whole thread.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
enviro
Senior Member
****
Offline


Taking Out The Trash

Posts: 323
Weethalle NSW
Gender: male
Re: freediver is a Jehovah's Witness
Reply #43 - Apr 19th, 2007 at 12:36pm
 
A very interesting debate and all have great points. Keep in mind we are all different in how we express our views and we are all stubborn when it comes to being attacked on our age old beliefs.

Zoso has argued extremely well and he is right in many areas particularly when he states that Freediver never backs down and admits that he is wrong. Keep in mind the reader can see this and it lowers their opinion of the overal argument that tarnishes the respect of freediver.

I have had many debates with freediver and it didn't take me long to work out that he is set in his ways and beliefs. I now very rarely enter a debate with him because nobody wants to talk to a brick wall. I've debated everything from water to nuclear with him and I find that even when he has no argument he will just repeat a previous comment that had already been nullified.

Freediver's mission is to keep the debate alive. The only way to do this is to not agree with anyone but also give good argument. At some point the debate must finnish. Try not to get the last word in if you have no real argument left.

As for giving out personal information well, that's a personal choice. Wink

Everyone knows that religion and politics go hand in hand so Sense can write anything he likes. As for this site being a religious dominated site, I actually thought, initially, it was an arm of the APP. It doesn't really worry me because I just come straight into the forum and don't even look at the home page. I am more interested in other peoples opinions than pushing my own.

Sometimes I think SprintCyclist is also Freediver, or atleast a family member or friend. He only seems to materialise when freedivers in trouble and his comments are over patronising towards freediver and this site. I could be wrong, actually I hope I am. Hows the bike riding going freediver? Been run over yet?
Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Me being freediver
Reply #44 - Apr 19th, 2007 at 1:05pm
 
Hi enviro,

No, I'm not freediver.

Yes, I like this site,  freediver made it, I appreciate the effort he has made.

many topics I dont enter into, they just don't rattle my cage.

zoso does arue well. 

take care
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print