I promise, I really promise -- if you can spare just 13 minutes for this vid, you will know all you need to know about how the many threads here in these forums begin, heat up, and eventually die unnoticed and unmourned. Really --- I promise!
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Everything you ever needed to know about debates on Religious Forums
- Thread starter Evangelicalhumanist
- Start date
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Thoughty? Lol.
I'll just study Aron Ra on how a good debate is done.
I'll just study Aron Ra on how a good debate is done.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Wouldn't this apply to both argumentative?
Scoff if you like -- he's smarter than most of us, including me.
And what makes us argumentative? Thinking we're right, without really knowing why? That's often my suspicion.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Yes. I believe if you can apply it to one side you can the other since we're all human. To say otherwise, in my view, is more pride in numbers.
And if you were to actually view the vid, you'd find out he says exactly that!!
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
What pride in numbers?
I didn't say I disagree with the video. There are people who lack more knowledge than others in scientific means. I wouldn't call them stupid, though. Though a couple of topics threw me off but I did watch it. I'm in my head wondering where the OP is going but nonetheless it should be both sides. It makes it seem like it's one sided... stupid vs. smart people and the stupid people are believing the earth made of cheese. Its an interesting video, I must say.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I don't know why we think "we're" right from scientific facts to earth made of cheese since as layman we can only get but so much information without hidden variables. But this "gap" in knowledge is present on both sides-to say 'we' is quite correct. And if a thousand people say they are correct and others are not to me that's pride in numbers.
Maybe we're all stupid?
I think the single thing that -- to me, at least -- says the most about a person's intelligence is the ability to say "I don't know." The person who, when he truly does NOT know, can't say that but continues to argue anyway, is one that I would consider truly stupid.
Let's forget about the moon-made-of-cheese argument (there is no argument, it ain't), but instead consider the evolution argument -- which has been raging in every religious forum since forums were invented. And here is what I've found about that:
The evolution deniers consistently state, and I mean consistently, that no dog ever gave birth to a cat (or this to that, or those to them, or what-have-you), but never -- NEVER -- make the slightest effort to explain the fantastic variety of life (now, and extinct from the past) except to say "God did it, hid it, don't know why, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it."
Just so you know, I think that is stupid.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I was thinking it could be more educational and less bias if he didn't separate stupid and smart people in the begining and end of his speech. It makes it seem there's a hidden agenda. There's a lot of clips on YouTube that have hidden agenda themes.
Or, if one wants to read something relevant perhaps - rather than view the video:
5 Reasons Why People Stick to Their Beliefs, No Matter What
5 Reasons Why People Stick to Their Beliefs, No Matter What
Last edited:
Heyo
Veteran Member
One thing that he didn't mention: peer pressure/"in"group think.
We tend to value opinion more if it is stated by people who are like us.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Sometimes you have to make the rules state that you are not having a debate. That was the strategy with Kent Hovind. It was a "discussion" and as a result every time that Kent made an error or lied Aron could butt in. So strictly speaking it was not a debate, just a continued Hovind spanking fest. Hovind could not quit due to his ego. And he could not win because he kept getting knocked off script. It was brilliant.
