Debating the unprovable... - Page 3

HarryT · 09-23-2010, 01:50 PM

No, I didn't know that - that's very interesting!

Graham · 09-23-2010, 01:54 PM

Re: reopening the debate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's certainly true, Neil.

Obviously you'll let us know if we step out of line, Harry, but at the moment I think we're on a slightly different topic - i.e. how to conduct an unprovable debate - and using the recently closed thread as an example, rather than continuing the debate from that thread.

Graham

ardeegee · 09-23-2010, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graham

There's nothing wrong with humour, but I daresay that, as someone who shares your views I found the videos funnier than someone who had opposing beliefs.

Again the target audience isn't true believers-- the audience is people who are willing to question. And a bit of satire/analogy can point out the silliness of beliefs (like the one about the hopping hamsters.) I don't expect the true believers to laugh along with me. The point is to show that something that they believe to the very heart of their being to be true and base their entire lives around to be silly superstition. It is saying that something that is taken very, very seriously by them, by their families, their friends, their community, and their culture is silly enough to be a big joke. In what way would you propose that one present that so that they "laugh with it" too? I don't think it likely to find a way that they won't be offended by that. We aren't attempting to laugh with them.

GrimRedBones · 09-23-2010, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardeegee

And I think a little (or a lot) of mocking can go further to show how silly some beliefs are than any amount of dry prose. Look at some of the bitingly funny videos I linked in the closed thread.

Don't you think though, that rippin on people who don't share your beliefs is just a little pointless. Mocking them is just gonna turn up the tension. And it doesn't show them how sill there beliefs are.

HarryT · 09-23-2010, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graham

Re: reopening the debate.

Obviously you'll let us know if we step out of line, Harry, but at the moment I think we're on a slightly different topic - i.e. how to conduct an unprovable debate - and using the recently closed thread as an example, rather than continuing the debate from that thread.

Graham

Given that I'm taking part in the debate myself, Graham, you may rest assured that I will make sure that I don't end up in the position of having to ban myself

.

GrimRedBones · 09-23-2010, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Again the target audience isn't true believers-- the audience is people who are willing to question. And a bit of satire/analogy can point out the silliness of beliefs (like the one about the hopping hamsters.) I don't expect the true believers to laugh along with me. The point is to show that something that they believe to the very heart of their being to be true and base their entire lives around to be silly superstition. It is saying that something that is taken very, very seriously by them, by their families, their friends, their community, and their culture is silly enough to be a big joke. In what way would you propose that one present that so that they "laugh with it" too? I don't think it likely to find a way that they won't be offended by that. We aren't attempting to laugh with them.

I'm not sure that people who are sitting on the fence are going to be impressed with the side which is just cracking jokes at the others expense.

Graham · 09-23-2010, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Again the target audience isn't true believers-- the audience is people who are willing to question. And a bit of satire/analogy can point out the silliness of beliefs (like the one about the hopping hamsters.) I don't expect the true believers to laugh along with me. The point is to show that something that they believe to the very heart of their being to be true and base their entire lives around to be silly superstition. In what way would you propose that one present that so that they "laugh with it" too? We aren't attempting to laugh with them.

Again it's a sliding scale, and my feeling is that the more inclusive you can be the better the long term chance of real progress.

One way, though, is to poke a little fun at the extremes of both sides within the same joke/sketch. This can get everyone laughing, while still getting the basic facts across.

Graham

ardeegee · 09-23-2010, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, I didn't know that - that's very interesting!

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...=&oq=&gs_rfai=

HarryT · 09-23-2010, 02:00 PM

Trouble is, GRB, that it's essentially an unwinnable debate. The atheists will say "where's the evidence?" and the believers will say "it's not a matter of evidence, but of faith", and neither side is going to convince the other of their case.

Sparrow · 09-23-2010, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Given that I'm taking part in the debate myself, Graham, you may rest assured that I will make sure that I don't end up in the position of having to ban myself

.

Have the transgressors in the other thread been PMed to advise them where they crossed the line?
Just looking for some reassurance it t'weren't me (I haven't received such a PM)

.

GrimRedBones · 09-23-2010, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Trouble is, GRB, that it's essentially an unwinnable debate. The atheists will say "where's the evidence?" and the believers will say "it's not a matter of evidence, but of faith", and neither side is going to convince the other of their case.

I was looking at that thread a bit ... (actually because it was really funny in parts) but it seems that the believers were talking about morality and its fount being the godhead. Of course the believers can't come up with the physical evidence... but the arguments pretty interesting.

ardeegee · 09-23-2010, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparrow

Have the transgressors in the other thread been PMed to advise them where they crossed the line?
Just looking for some reassurance it t'weren't me (I haven't received such a PM)

.

Unless you made close to 300 posts in that thread in a matter of a few hours, I think you're good.

HarryT · 09-23-2010, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparrow

Have the transgressors in the other thread been PMed to advise them where they crossed the line?

Don't worry, it wasn't you.

HarryT · 09-23-2010, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrimRedBones

I was looking at that thread a bit ... (actually because it was really funny in parts) but it seems that the believers were talking about morality and its fount being the godhead. Of course the believers can't come up with the physical evidence... but the arguments pretty interesting.

The counter-argument being, of course, that one has systems of moral philosophy (and the one I'm most familiar with personally is that propounded by Plato) which are entirely divorced from religion. (That's why, almost uniquely among ancient philosophers, the works of Plato have come down to us complete; the early church fathers such as Augustine considered him to have been a "Christian who just happened to live before Christ", and preserved his teachings.)

GrimRedBones · 09-23-2010, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

The counter-argument being, of course, that one has systems of moral philosophy (and the one I'm most familiar with personally is that propounded by Plato) which are entirely divorced from religion. (That's why, almost uniquely among ancient philosophers, the works of Plato have come down to us complete; the early church fathers such as Augustine considered him to have been a "Christian who just happened to live before Christ", and preserved his teachings.)

Doesn't plato have a supernatural system tacked on to the end of the Republic?

09-23-2010, 01:50 PM	#31
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,560 Karma: 93980341 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	No, I didn't know that - that's very interesting!

09-23-2010, 02:00 PM	#39
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,560 Karma: 93980341 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	Trouble is, GRB, that it's essentially an unwinnable debate. The atheists will say "where's the evidence?" and the believers will say "it's not a matter of evidence, but of faith", and neither side is going to convince the other of their case.