I'd like to practice debating

digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
I'd like to practice debating

I'd like to practice debating. Would any one like to help me work on my skills?


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
I'll give it a try.

                     A week ago I would have said study Hitchens videos and follow his style,  which is still a good idea BUT  the Ham & Nye video is now your best study tool.  I freely admit that I thought it was a bad idea and I wrote on this site enough times I wished Nye would back out.                     Nye not only held his own but excelled.  I forgot how much experience Bill Nye had with takeing complicated science concepts and turning them into easy to understand information memes.  Easy enough for a creationist to understand and Ham clearly realized it. Nye managed to stay on HIS points and actually avoided debating religion even when Ham was baiting him "we have a book that explains it' the bible".  Ham was clearly getting frustrated while Nye kept pushing his science information and even challenging theist patriotisim.  "to stay ahead of the world we have to teach and promote science".   Ham had no answer to that.                      Ham kept talking of religion and faith,  Nye ignored it and stayed on his topic;  learn from Nye,  stay on your topic, challenge the opponent to predict scientific outcomes based on THEIR beliefs [Ham didn't even try to answer that challenge] and don't be destracted from your planned topic.                     Hitchens is a philosopher his style and words are good to copy but for pure unchallenged easy to understand facts copy Nye.   

 

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5133
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Yeah ok, Dig.

 

digitalbeachbum wrote:
I'd like to practice debating. Would any one like to help me work on my skills?

 

I'll channel my former fundamentalist christian self in the affirmative. Imagine me carrying a good news bible. In my Holden Torana A9X are the entire set of Keith Green tapes. 

I argue that the Book of Genesis reliably supports the fact there is one God. That God is the creator. That a relationship with humans is possible. That Genesis is a reliable historical document. 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I'd offer to help but to

I'd offer to help but to truly be great at debate you need to be able to argue for things you know are false, and still come out on top. That's something I've never been able to do. I can destroy anything coming across my plate when I know I'm right. But the second I find myself about to defend something I know isn't true I have to back out.
I've had some very good debates over the years (and some terrible ones), but one in particular has always stood out to me that proves I can't be a master of debate. It was in the early days of forums, after bulletin boards were dying off. And it was about the storyline in Final Fantasy VIII. I was winning the debate for two days straight until my opponent pulled out a quote from the game that absolutely destroyed my position. If I were a master at debate, I could have kept going. But instead I had nowhere to go and conceded. It's the only debate I've ever lost. And I lost because I couldn't debate with lies and omissions and other little tricks. I can stand against them indefinitely, but I can't embrace them for even a moment.
I'm therefore not much use to anyone as a practice partner.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Jabberwocky
atheist
Posts: 411
Joined: 2012-04-21
User is offlineOffline
Take any debate involving

Take any debate involving Dinesh D'Souza (preferably one that you haven't seen with an opponent you haven't seen him debate). He is so insanely full of shit. However he's a pro at it. Hell, he convinced both his wife AND his mistress (now his fiancee...wife maybe?) to donate to a political campaign only to re-imburse them both later in order to circumvent the limits for political donations (which he has now been busted for). He's clearly convincing. Anyways, take a debate by him, and write notes while he speaks to whittle down his points into short bullet-point form, and see if you can counter it very quickly. Also, great advice by Vastet as well. Attempt to make a case for something that you know not to be true. 

 

On an unrelated note Vastet, was it Squall is dead theory?

 

Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Jabberwocky wrote:Take any

Jabberwocky wrote:

Take any debate involving Dinesh D'Souza (preferably one that you haven't seen with an opponent you haven't seen him debate). He is so insanely full of shit. However he's a pro at it. Hell, he convinced both his wife AND his mistress (now his fiancee...wife maybe?) to donate to a political campaign only to re-imburse them both later in order to circumvent the limits for political donations (which he has now been busted for). He's clearly convincing. Anyways, take a debate by him, and write notes while he speaks to whittle down his points into short bullet-point form, and see if you can counter it very quickly. Also, great advice by Vastet as well. Attempt to make a case for something that you know not to be true. 

 

On an unrelated note Vastet, was it Squall is dead theory?

 

No it was the familial relationship between Squall & Ellone. I had concluded they were brother & sister. But as it turned out they weren't.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
There is a pastor I meet

There is a pastor I meet with every now and then and we discuss topics for an hour or two.   In the end I'm not sure it leads to anything, as it does not appear either of us end up being swayed.  However, he does admit my arguments make him think; and it forces me to make my ideas more articulate; as well as to remain civil, which I'm not wont to do when discussing religion. 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


Jabberwocky
atheist
Posts: 411
Joined: 2012-04-21
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Jabberwocky

Vastet wrote:
Jabberwocky wrote:

On an unrelated note Vastet, was it Squall is dead theory?

 

No it was the familial relationship between Squall & Ellone. I had concluded they were brother & sister. But as it turned out they weren't.

 

Ahh. Easy mistake to make for sure. I thought so for a while as well (especially since I didn't beat the game until a few years ago).

 

 

Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5133
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
This is

zarathustra wrote:

There is a pastor I meet with every now and then and we discuss topics for an hour or two.   In the end I'm not sure it leads to anything, as it does not appear either of us end up being swayed.  However, he does admit my arguments make him think; and it forces me to make my ideas more articulate; as well as to remain civil, which I'm not wont to do when discussing religion. 

 

very nicely put, Zara. 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:Ham kept

Jeffrick wrote:
Ham kept talking of religion and faith,  Nye ignored it and stayed on his topic;  learn from Nye,  stay on your topic, challenge the opponent to predict scientific outcomes based on THEIR beliefs [Ham didn't even try to answer that challenge] and don't be destracted from your planned topic.

 Hitchens is a philosopher his style and words are good to copy but for pure unchallenged easy to understand facts copy Nye.

Good points to take heed on, stay on topic, don't get side tracked.

I often do that when I discuss items with others, they lead me off the original subject and I've gotten lost on my original arguement.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:I'd offer to

Vastet wrote:
I'd offer to help but to truly be great at debate you need to be able to argue for things you know are false, and still come out on top. That's something I've never been able to do. I can destroy anything coming across my plate when I know I'm right. But the second I find myself about to defend something I know isn't true I have to back out. I've had some very good debates over the years (and some terrible ones), but one in particular has always stood out to me that proves I can't be a master of debate. It was in the early days of forums, after bulletin boards were dying off. And it was about the storyline in Final Fantasy VIII. I was winning the debate for two days straight until my opponent pulled out a quote from the game that absolutely destroyed my position. If I were a master at debate, I could have kept going. But instead I had nowhere to go and conceded. It's the only debate I've ever lost. And I lost because I couldn't debate with lies and omissions and other little tricks. I can stand against them indefinitely, but I can't embrace them for even a moment. I'm therefore not much use to anyone as a practice partner.

This response is to AE and you Vas,

Damn. I've heard that over and over again but I can't find it in me to defend something I know is false. It's basically lying and I really dislike it; yeah I do lie in real life for specific reasons (like I didn't eat that cookie or no I wasn't speeding officer...)

Trying to defend a subject which is false is like trying to swallow poison you know is going to not kill you but eat out your stomach.

I'll see if I can do it though, for the sake of bettering myself. I'll try and build a case for "religion" but not Christianity.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:Vastet

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Vastet wrote:
I'd offer to help but to truly be great at debate you need to be able to argue for things you know are false, and still come out on top. That's something I've never been able to do. I can destroy anything coming across my plate when I know I'm right. But the second I find myself about to defend something I know isn't true I have to back out. I've had some very good debates over the years (and some terrible ones), but one in particular has always stood out to me that proves I can't be a master of debate. It was in the early days of forums, after bulletin boards were dying off. And it was about the storyline in Final Fantasy VIII. I was winning the debate for two days straight until my opponent pulled out a quote from the game that absolutely destroyed my position. If I were a master at debate, I could have kept going. But instead I had nowhere to go and conceded. It's the only debate I've ever lost. And I lost because I couldn't debate with lies and omissions and other little tricks. I can stand against them indefinitely, but I can't embrace them for even a moment. I'm therefore not much use to anyone as a practice partner.

This response is to AE and you Vas,

Damn. I've heard that over and over again but I can't find it in me to defend something I know is false. It's basically lying and I really dislike it; yeah I do lie in real life for specific reasons (like I didn't eat that cookie or no I wasn't speeding officer...)

Trying to defend a subject which is false is like trying to swallow poison you know is going to not kill you but eat out your stomach.

I'll see if I can do it though, for the sake of bettering myself. I'll try and build a case for "religion" but not Christianity.

You don't have to lie, you just have to accentuate the positives. For example, to defend religion in a debate, you would shift the discussion away from proving it is true, to emphasizing the positive effects of the religion. A big part of successful debate technique is controlling the direction.  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving

Beyond Saving wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Vastet wrote:
I'd offer to help but to truly be great at debate you need to be able to argue for things you know are false, and still come out on top. That's something I've never been able to do. I can destroy anything coming across my plate when I know I'm right. But the second I find myself about to defend something I know isn't true I have to back out. I've had some very good debates over the years (and some terrible ones), but one in particular has always stood out to me that proves I can't be a master of debate. It was in the early days of forums, after bulletin boards were dying off. And it was about the storyline in Final Fantasy VIII. I was winning the debate for two days straight until my opponent pulled out a quote from the game that absolutely destroyed my position. If I were a master at debate, I could have kept going. But instead I had nowhere to go and conceded. It's the only debate I've ever lost. And I lost because I couldn't debate with lies and omissions and other little tricks. I can stand against them indefinitely, but I can't embrace them for even a moment. I'm therefore not much use to anyone as a practice partner.

This response is to AE and you Vas,

Damn. I've heard that over and over again but I can't find it in me to defend something I know is false. It's basically lying and I really dislike it; yeah I do lie in real life for specific reasons (like I didn't eat that cookie or no I wasn't speeding officer...)

Trying to defend a subject which is false is like trying to swallow poison you know is going to not kill you but eat out your stomach.

I'll see if I can do it though, for the sake of bettering myself. I'll try and build a case for "religion" but not Christianity.

You don't have to lie, you just have to accentuate the positives. For example, to defend religion in a debate, you would shift the discussion away from proving it is true, to emphasizing the positive effects of the religion. A big part of successful debate technique is controlling the direction.  

I've been trying that too but every time I come up with a talking point I think is good I just remeber that it is bullshit.

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Well religion does have some

Well religion does have some redeeming qualities, so if I can shift the argument in that direction I could see getting somewhere with it.
It wouldn't be easy ignoring and/or bypassing the irredeemable qualities though. Especially since some of the great things about religion are simultaneously the most horrible.
I'd do better defending smoking than religion.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.