Debate (was Re: Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin)
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: People could use that skill in on-line discussions! That assumes there aren't crazy religionists trying to play the system to promote their superstitious pernicious garbage. Much more than that. The essence of reasonable debate is that the participants are armed with sufficient education and discipline to resist irrationality and form arguments that provoke greater understanding, knowledge and perhaps wisdom. For many years now, I have believed that this is one of the ways in which the Internet is shaping the long-term future. Despite the flame wars, gossip and general nonsense that happens in on-line communities, I do believe that many people are rediscovering the value of argument, the power of diverse viewpoints in problem-solving. This is the stuff that stimulates creativity, I believe -- creativity which, even if limited to a minority, can have a profound positive impact on all. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Debate (was Re: Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin)
On 30 Aug 2008, at 17:13, Nick Arnett wrote: On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People could use that skill in on-line discussions! That assumes there aren't crazy religionists trying to play the system to promote their superstitious pernicious garbage. Much more than that. The essence of reasonable debate is that the participants are armed with sufficient education and discipline to resist irrationality and form arguments that provoke greater understanding, knowledge and perhaps wisdom. And there are people who know that they will lose a reasonable debate and therefore deliberately sabotage reasonable debate by using lies and illogic and any other dirty tricks they can come up with instead of reasonable debate. Creationists are such a group. Liars Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ You are coming to a sad realization. Cancel or Allow? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Debate (was Re: Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin)
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 9:43 AM, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: And there are people who know that they will lose a reasonable debate and therefore deliberately sabotage reasonable debate by using lies and illogic and any other dirty tricks they can come up with instead of reasonable debate. I hope you can deal with the fact that I pretty much agree, though I generally am wary of generalizations. When people try to use science to defend their religious beliefs, the science almost inevitably is poor. For me, faith has to do with the inexplicable and uncontrollable. I guess I'm particularly dismayed when people regard a scientific explanation -- evolution is the prime example -- as a threat to their faith. That makes zero sense to me. Now that I think of it, there's sort of an opposite kind of childish thinking that dismays me. I was at a friend's funeral last week and his town's mayor said something like, God must have needed another angel and he wanted one of the best. Ack! When I hear people say stuff like that, William, I can totally understand why you and others find religion offensive. The idea that a Supreme Being caused a motorcycle to kill my friend because He needed an angel... that's insane. My wife called it spiritual immaturity. She's quicker than I am to find compassion. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
