-
ℹ️ Heads up...
This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.
Controversy
- Thread starter Simon
- Start date
It may not be 'meaningless' but how on earth are we to know whether it is or not, unless it is followed up by a justification?
I can say there are three invisible, speaking lima beans on the moon, but you can't assume that there is any basis of truth in that statement unless I give you some kind of reason for thinking so.
I can say there are three invisible, speaking lima beans on the moon, but you can't assume that there is any basis of truth in that statement unless I give you some kind of reason for thinking so.
OK, Fredward, last one from me on this particular strand.
Debate isn't about wading in, stating your beliefs and then refusing to comment any further than "I disagree" when they are challenged.
If that's your standpoint, to me you'd be the sort of person who not only wouldn't post in a debate topic, but should have no interest in doing so.
It's rude to other people who take the time to justify and expound on arguments that others just pig-headedly refuse to engage.
In pluk's terms this was one post I hasten to add, so not exactly a repeat offender (if you'll excuse the irony!) but still, I absolutely agree with Sam that posts like this should be discouraged.
Debate isn't about wading in, stating your beliefs and then refusing to comment any further than "I disagree" when they are challenged.
If that's your standpoint, to me you'd be the sort of person who not only wouldn't post in a debate topic, but should have no interest in doing so.
It's rude to other people who take the time to justify and expound on arguments that others just pig-headedly refuse to engage.
In pluk's terms this was one post I hasten to add, so not exactly a repeat offender (if you'll excuse the irony!) but still, I absolutely agree with Sam that posts like this should be discouraged.
It's not a discussion to yell opposing opinions at each other without explaining why you believe yourself to be right.
If a kid in school turned round and started telling their geography teacher that they believed the world is flat, would the teacher have to back down and say "ok, those are your beliefs and you don't have to prove them"?
Obviously the topic in which the example we are discussing is a much more complicated issue than that, but the point still stands that if you want to be taken seriously (which I assume everyone does at some level) then you have to justify your position.
If a kid in school turned round and started telling their geography teacher that they believed the world is flat, would the teacher have to back down and say "ok, those are your beliefs and you don't have to prove them"?
Obviously the topic in which the example we are discussing is a much more complicated issue than that, but the point still stands that if you want to be taken seriously (which I assume everyone does at some level) then you have to justify your position.
But it doesn't harm anyone, and not everyone wants to be in a hardcore debate.
If you don't like said posts ignore them. Simple, it doesn't cause the world to crash down.
Just because someone doesn't want to write an essay doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to add there two cents.
I think its things like this which cause the criticism against the forum that "you require an English degree to post here" not that I agree however...
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
If you don't like said posts ignore them. Simple, it doesn't cause the world to crash down.
Just because someone doesn't want to write an essay doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to add there two cents.
I think its things like this which cause the criticism against the forum that "you require an English degree to post here" not that I agree however...
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
I lied, not the last one then 
It harms debate, and it's not very thoughtful. If I've taken the time to construct an argument, only for that to be replied to with what is effectively "well you're wrong", it's quite annoying. You either want to engage in debate or you don't, and if you don't then you don't post. It's just not on to refuse to engage by effectively just stonewalling challenges. Poor show.
We're not asking for essays, we're asking for justification. A discussion has to be a two-way thing or it's not a discussion.
Even if pluk had simply added "can't explain now as I'm rather tied up, but will elaborate later" that would have been more acceptable, IMO.
Fredward said:
It harms debate, and it's not very thoughtful. If I've taken the time to construct an argument, only for that to be replied to with what is effectively "well you're wrong", it's quite annoying. You either want to engage in debate or you don't, and if you don't then you don't post. It's just not on to refuse to engage by effectively just stonewalling challenges. Poor show.
Fredward said:
We're not asking for essays, we're asking for justification. A discussion has to be a two-way thing or it's not a discussion.
Even if pluk had simply added "can't explain now as I'm rather tied up, but will elaborate later" that would have been more acceptable, IMO.
It does harm someone actually. If we as a society are to take opinions which appear to based on nothing, as serious points, that leads to bad decisions being made on no evidence and the consequences of those actions can be very harmful.
The 'two cents' in this case is more like zero cents as nothing reasoned is being added to the discussion. So if I say "I think all children should be killed" but refuse to explain why I can justify that position, I am adding nothing but a wild, unsubstantiated statement. Anyone reasonable should be able to pick me up on not explaining that. (By the way, I don't think all children should be killed).
Unsubstantiated statements add nothing at all.
Here are a few more:
"Jesus was made of cheese and used printer ink cartridges"
"Your opinion is wrong, because I said so"
"Jews and black people are evil"
Any of those statements have to be explained otherwise they are meaningless to everyone other then the poster (assuming that the poster has indeed got a valid reason for saying those things).
(P.s. again, I just to be clear, I don't think Jesus was made of anything unusual, and I don't think any race of people are evil).
The 'two cents' in this case is more like zero cents as nothing reasoned is being added to the discussion. So if I say "I think all children should be killed" but refuse to explain why I can justify that position, I am adding nothing but a wild, unsubstantiated statement. Anyone reasonable should be able to pick me up on not explaining that. (By the way, I don't think all children should be killed).
Unsubstantiated statements add nothing at all.
Here are a few more:
"Jesus was made of cheese and used printer ink cartridges"
"Your opinion is wrong, because I said so"
"Jews and black people are evil"
Any of those statements have to be explained otherwise they are meaningless to everyone other then the poster (assuming that the poster has indeed got a valid reason for saying those things).
(P.s. again, I just to be clear, I don't think Jesus was made of anything unusual, and I don't think any race of people are evil).
No-one's saying society is going to break down, but I don't see why on earth we should be applying different standards to reasoned discussion from anywhere else. Everyone on this forum is capable of defending their arguments if they really review and consider what it is they are saying.
Anyway as Simon already said, if you are not interested in discussing the strengths and weaknesses in someone's opinion, why on earth are you getting involved?
Discussion isn't stating an opinion and expecting it to get respected. Respect for your argument has to be earnt through reasoning.
Anyway as Simon already said, if you are not interested in discussing the strengths and weaknesses in someone's opinion, why on earth are you getting involved?
Discussion isn't stating an opinion and expecting it to get respected. Respect for your argument has to be earnt through reasoning.
Squiggs
TS Team
Where it is possible, perhaps the issue of people wanting to be involved, but not actually wanting to engage in the debate themselves could be solved by a simple poll being included so people could state if they are for or against the motion.
Obviously this would only work when there are very polar arguments being put forward, but it might allow people, who otherwise would just end up posting "I (dis)agree", to get involved without cluttering up the topic. Providing a bit of a spectators gallery if you will.
Obviously this would only work when there are very polar arguments being put forward, but it might allow people, who otherwise would just end up posting "I (dis)agree", to get involved without cluttering up the topic. Providing a bit of a spectators gallery if you will.
Tom
TS Member
If someone contributes to the crime and punishment threda by saying "I support capital punishment. always have an always will" - they might get a "care to explain that?" sort of response, but no one would have a go at them and they would have their views on record for other members to see. It might prove to eb a talking point in future, perhaps on a meet, if they didn't know that about the member (but knew many other things) before. I do not see a problem with it whatsoever.
Squiggs said:
Taking the "Crime and Punishment" thread as an example, is there anything that could be added that would allow more than one poll to be put up for a rather wide-ranging thread. I'm thinking, in the way that the discussion has moved on from capital punishment in there now, a new poll could be added to the same thread.
Do our techies know anything like this?
pluk
TS Member
My ears are burning!!
Thanks for the heads up Simon.
Basically, meh.
The comment that appears to offend so many so deeply was
a) Only part of the comment, the very next line and quote elaborated why the opinion of Sam, when it comes to policing matters, may well be very ill informed.
b) The brevity explained just a few minutes later when in my very next post:
I had read this thread with some amusement earlier today. I do intend to give a full opinion when the weather isn't so spiffing, but my replies were actually written with this thread in mind, strangely!
Thanks for the heads up Simon.
Basically, meh.
The comment that appears to offend so many so deeply was
a) Only part of the comment, the very next line and quote elaborated why the opinion of Sam, when it comes to policing matters, may well be very ill informed.
b) The brevity explained just a few minutes later when in my very next post:
I had read this thread with some amusement earlier today. I do intend to give a full opinion when the weather isn't so spiffing, but my replies were actually written with this thread in mind, strangely!
Sam
TS Member
No. Posts that simply contradict others without providing any sort of justification are not welcome in a debate. I don't care if that's because they don't have time, or they just want to put their two cents in, or just want to have a casual conversation or whatever else Fredward has says. Posts like that should be deleted on sight.
Entering a debate simply to put forward your opinion and then withdrawing and refusing to answer any criticism of that opinion is arrogant and selfish, and ruins the topic for people who are informed on issues and want to debate in a logical way.
Fortunately, pluk did later provide some justification for his simple "you don't know what you're talking about".
Entering a debate simply to put forward your opinion and then withdrawing and refusing to answer any criticism of that opinion is arrogant and selfish, and ruins the topic for people who are informed on issues and want to debate in a logical way.
Fortunately, pluk did later provide some justification for his simple "you don't know what you're talking about".
IanB
TS Member
Are these threads Debates, or just a casual conversation?
I think they are a bit of both, with different people wanting different things from them.
Do people want to have debates on the forum, or just casual conversations?
I want a mix, but I can not answer for the rest of the community.
Is not forcing people to have to debate something, limiting their freedom of speech?
Yes it is, but if as a Community that is the route we go down, and its explained to members, I guess its not a problem. I just think that you need to ensure people who don't want to debate stuff have somewhere to post as well.
I was just going to ask these rhetorically , but I thought it was only fair I answered them
While I do Agree with Simon, that people should just jump in, and not be worried about upsetting people, or people attacking you (this is great experience for real life) I can not help but worry that sometimes things come across as to aggressive.
As with anything, I think its right to raise the issue, and right to discuss the issue, but as with all the topics, you are never going to please everyone 100% of the time.
If as a Community we decide to go down the route of encouraging these "debate" topics to carry on, does the name of Corner Coffee need changing to something that does not imply its for people to drop in and have a casual chat about the world?
I understand why Simon seems against a separate area for these debate topics, but I think that if the Corner Coffee threads has a sticky pointing people to the new area, it allows the best of both worlds, and again, having a "Speaker" in charge of the new area, would not increase the work load of the current moderators.
I think a guide to how to successfully post a counter argument could also help people out, something that gives guidelines. It could be as simple as:
Write your opinion and include a source to back it up.
I am sure there is more to it, than that, and that's why someone with a bit more Skill (I am looking at you Simon) in this area could help out.
Ian
Edit: Compromise
Maybe we could have a monthly, or two monthly debate topics for these heated arguments to take place. That way they are in the same place as normal threads, which if are a similar area, can direct people to the debate topic if they wish to debate, and allow other members to have a casual chat. It allows people to focus their debating on a couple of areas, rather than in loads of different areas at the same time?
I think they are a bit of both, with different people wanting different things from them.
Do people want to have debates on the forum, or just casual conversations?
I want a mix, but I can not answer for the rest of the community.
Is not forcing people to have to debate something, limiting their freedom of speech?
Yes it is, but if as a Community that is the route we go down, and its explained to members, I guess its not a problem. I just think that you need to ensure people who don't want to debate stuff have somewhere to post as well.
I was just going to ask these rhetorically , but I thought it was only fair I answered them
While I do Agree with Simon, that people should just jump in, and not be worried about upsetting people, or people attacking you (this is great experience for real life) I can not help but worry that sometimes things come across as to aggressive.
As with anything, I think its right to raise the issue, and right to discuss the issue, but as with all the topics, you are never going to please everyone 100% of the time.
If as a Community we decide to go down the route of encouraging these "debate" topics to carry on, does the name of Corner Coffee need changing to something that does not imply its for people to drop in and have a casual chat about the world?
I understand why Simon seems against a separate area for these debate topics, but I think that if the Corner Coffee threads has a sticky pointing people to the new area, it allows the best of both worlds, and again, having a "Speaker" in charge of the new area, would not increase the work load of the current moderators.
I think a guide to how to successfully post a counter argument could also help people out, something that gives guidelines. It could be as simple as:
Write your opinion and include a source to back it up.
I am sure there is more to it, than that, and that's why someone with a bit more Skill (I am looking at you Simon) in this area could help out.
Ian
Edit: Compromise
Maybe we could have a monthly, or two monthly debate topics for these heated arguments to take place. That way they are in the same place as normal threads, which if are a similar area, can direct people to the debate topic if they wish to debate, and allow other members to have a casual chat. It allows people to focus their debating on a couple of areas, rather than in loads of different areas at the same time?