• 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!

the Wonder of horror of the internet.

tarasan

Well-Known Member
I have been debating people on the internet for a while and one thing has begun to discourage me from debating here and that with the "easy access to ideas".

let me go into this view with an example. say you are an evolutionist discussing a creationist and they sight a source from some website and portray that as evidence. Now you know the answer is wrong but because you yourself can only sight internet websites it seems like the debate from the onlookers perspective, has an equal number of "respectable" sources.

Now perhaps im over reacting to this incident I had but i wanted your guys opinion.

should we really only accept books and author qualifications when it comes to sources?

or do we need some kind of academic standard when it comes to distinguishing a good source from a bad? Im saying this because there is such a standard in Academia.... not so much on a forum like this..
 

Songbird

She rules her life like a bird in flight
Skilled and educated debaters recognize poor sources easily. But misinformation abounds among the rest of us.

A while ago Quagmire suggested a scholar DIR where only qualified posters could comment with authority in certain threads. It's one way to help distinguish between internet crap and academia. It's just in the idea stage, though.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Skilled and educated debaters recognize poor sources easily. But misinformation abounds among the rest of us.
A while ago Quagmire suggested a scholar DIR where only qualified posters could comment with authority in certain threads. It's one way to help distinguish between internet crap and academia. It's just in the idea stage, though.
Sounds peachy! That way, all the learned & smart posters will go there, leaving us with the rantings & ravings of......you know who.
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
I have been debating people on the internet for a while and one thing has begun to discourage me from debating here and that with the "easy access to ideas".

let me go into this view with an example. say you are an evolutionist discussing a creationist and they sight a source from some website and portray that as evidence. Now you know the answer is wrong but because you yourself can only sight internet websites it seems like the debate from the onlookers perspective, has an equal number of "respectable" sources.

Now perhaps im over reacting to this incident I had but i wanted your guys opinion.

should we really only accept books and author qualifications when it comes to sources?

or do we need some kind of academic standard when it comes to distinguishing a good source from a bad? Im saying this because there is such a standard in Academia.... not so much on a forum like this..

That's not true at all, Tarasan. In fact, I was just reading an article from smartpeeplewhoknowstuffandstuff.com that says that "NEthing that gets posted on teh web iz tru becuz itz posted on the web so it must be tru, 'n stuff".

How can you argue with that? :shrug:
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Haaa, yes. Well, I won't qualify. :p
We'll be left with posters who want to argue about some mis-quoted or mis-iterpreted post...
...or about why I'm just so darned inadequate, crazy or frothing at the mouth with Kool-Aid.
(Now, that's only about 75% of the time.)
 

tarasan

Well-Known Member
Haaa, yes. Well, I won't qualify. :p

I guess I just find it annoying because unless I go into an essay showing why academic standards are the way they are, people will always go with what is more comfortable rather than what is true.

and Songbird is not about qualifications, is more to do with how devotedly you read, and how well you think.

and i know you do one of those splendidly :eek:
 

tarasan

Well-Known Member
We'll be left with posters who want to argue about some mis-quoted or mis-iterpreted post...
...or about why I'm just so darned inadequate, crazy or frothing at the mouth with Kool-Aid.
(Now, that's only about 75% of the time.)

you however fail, because of your threatening rake!!!!

for shame.......
 

tarasan

Well-Known Member
We'll be left with posters who want to argue about some mis-quoted or mis-iterpreted post...
...or about why I'm just so darned inadequate, crazy or frothing at the mouth with Kool-Aid.
(Now, that's only about 75% of the time.)
and im calling lies about the cool aid......

its too dam good so you must only pass it up 5 percent of time....


be honest....
 

tarasan

Well-Known Member
That's not true at all, Tarasan. In fact, I was just reading an article from smartpeeplewhoknowstuffandstuff.com that says that "NEthing that gets posted on teh web iz tru becuz itz posted on the web so it must be tru, 'n stuff".

How can you argue with that? :shrug:


your right Quagmire....... the bloggers of the internet are our Gods....


AND WE MUST WORSHIP THEM!!!!
:bow::bow::bow::bow::bow::bow::bow:
 

Songbird

She rules her life like a bird in flight
I guess I just find it annoying because unless I go into an essay showing why academic standards are the way they are, people will always go with what is more comfortable rather than what is true.

and Songbird is not about qualifications, is more to do with how devotedly you read, and how well you think.

and i know you do one of those splendidly :eek:

Aw. :D

I'd say devoted reading and critical thinking would be qualifications.
 

Songbird

She rules her life like a bird in flight
We'll be left with posters who want to argue about some mis-quoted or mis-iterpreted post...
...or about why I'm just so darned inadequate, crazy or frothing at the mouth with Kool-Aid.
(Now, that's only about 75% of the time.)

But the crazy frothing at the mouth what makes you so endearing! And everyone loves Kool-Aid.
 
Top