Okay, so I should just let it go.But I won't.
This guy, he just infuriates me.
His myspace profile name is Atheism Sucks, so I should've known better and, again, all the more reason why I should just let it go. (Mind you, a site called Christianity Sucks would strike me as being just as ridiculous.)
So, anyway, someone just used the expression "Begs the question..." and they followed that with the freakin' question, the way I assume one should. And it reminded me of this insane debate I had with this guy. He would accuse me of dodging no matter what I said, and he'd say "Begs the question." but not follow up with a question, he was just all out a moron, or else I am, it just has to be one or the other in this case.
Got in a conversation with another theist and... she's so cool .Polite, well reasoned, I'm really enjoying our conversation, debate, whatever. And she understands that if I question her theory, attacking what she assumes is mine isn't a response. So, I'm pretty sure this guy is a moron.
What do you think? Read the "debate" by clicking here
and note how insanely friendly I tried to be. I am a pretty friendly guy for the most part.
7 comments:
ok, this guy seems intelligent part of the time, then says things like "more better". Most of his posts were downright confusing and nonsensical, or perhaps I b stoopid two. He doesn't seem to be capable of original or independent thought, simply posting the thoughts of others. Anyway, I declare Keith the winner* of this debate. I would be interested in your thoughts on directed evolution vs. Darwinian evolution, mainly in how you would explain the Cambrian explosion and the linear nature of the fossil record with few, if any, real dead ends for noticeable traits (not merely attributable to once desirable traits becoming undesirable due to environmental change). Mathematically there should be millions, possibly billions, of failures for every success, yet there is no fossil record of this.
*on a technicality (not so much a win on your part as a loss on his), plus I still believe morality is divine in inspiration.
P.S. wanna debate vegetarianism with you at some point, yay fun.
"If God didn't intend us to eat animals he wouldn't have made them of meat", not sure who said it but what better argument for theism - medium rare prime rib with grilled shrimp
I will have to do some research before responding to you. Something I didn't have to do at all while talking to the amazing Mr. Sucks.
The vegetarian debate would be great.
Would debate the ethics of it or the nutrition?
debating the nutrition would require a lot of research on my part, so it would take a while, but I'm up for a well-rounded debate of the topic. Incidentally, researching the nutritional aspects would be good for me since I'm applying to enter the health care field, it's possible you could even convert me on this one (don't count on it though, I still smoke knowing the negative effects). Would still like to know what question you were begging, and what you were begging it for (fun Sesame Street visual).
Yeah, I wouldn't have a whole lot to say on the nutrition front either, but sure lets have a go at it.
Let me know when you're ready to go and I'll start a topic. Peace.
let me study up and I'll get back to ya
thought it over. My connection is very slow, my time is limited, info available on the internet isn't very. when you're ready go ahead and make your post, I'll research and in a day or two respond and present my counterargument and so on. This will limit the time wasted researching extraneous topics, and I like to give thought out, coherent, intelligent arguments as opposed to Mr. begs the question.
The meaning of 'begs the question' has come up for me before, and there are a couple uses. The commonly used (if contested) new meaning is "raises the question."
There is an older meaning of 'begs the question,' which means that your conclusion presupposes the premise. There's a pretty good explanation here:
http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/begs.html
Wikipedia claims that it sometimes means to avoid a question, but I've never seen it in that context.
As far as the guy you were debating with, he made little sense. He kept saying you were avoiding the debate, but he frequently supplied no evidence to support his claims. He brings up the concept of sin as a means to justify why your morals are out of step with those promoted by some organized religions. I don't buy into the concept of sinning, so why would I place any stock in sin creating that difference? There's no reason to believe sin is anything more than a construct of man to dictate behavior, especially considering the prior power of the church in the state.
A final point: Only an ass would give you a hard time about not knowing something such as a more obscure meaning of a phrase. You shouldn't be chastised for not knowing something, only for an unwillingness to learn.
Post a Comment