Originally posted by Regret
She does not hold the burden of proof. The one disputing her claims does. She does not need to present the source unless a credible attack is made, unless she chooses to do so.
we are talking about debating, right? the burden of proof/evidence is on everyone who claims to speak fact or a valid opinion. or else it really is just a pissing contest.
Originally posted by Regret
As far as educating others goes, in situations as we describe the uneducated is typically saying that the educated doesn't know what they are talking about and are not interested in the sources.
if they are childish, then that is their problem. to assume the worst and use that as your basis for not debating is just as childish as well as unbelievable pompous.
Originally posted by Regret
Typical response to sources presented is an attack at the credibility of the sources, not an open minded researching of the source.
'typical' does not belong here. you cannot shrug off the obligation of proof/evidence because some people are deliberate and obnoxious. if that is the case then dont bother posting, because you are certainly not debating. again, a useless circular argument
Originally posted by Regret
The uneducated typically do feel that the educated are only on "a quest to see who'sdickdiploma is bigger."
as those who claimed to have achieved the status of "educated" sometimes feel that their big dick diploma is all they need in a debate. to hell with proof/evidence to support their claim...discussion...debate.
Originally posted by PVS
we are talking about debating, right? the burden of proof/evidence is on everyone who claims to speak fact or a valid opinion. or else it really is just a pissing contest.
An expert's opinion is proof/evidence. Her statement is enough until it is credibly attacked. Now if she were to speak on the subject of psychology I would expect her to then provide support because it is not her area of expertise, and when she and I have discussed psychology she has provided support for her beginning arguments.
The "pissing contests" occur because someone that is uneducated on the subject and is shown to be wrong will not concede their error. Conceding that one is wrong is the only method for advancing a debate. This is lacking in most cases of knowledge verses opinion.
Originally posted by Regret
An expert's opinion is proof/evidence. Her statement is enough until it is credibly attacked.
no, an expert's opinion is an opinion. a more valid opinion perhaps than one who is not as educated, but it is neither proof nor evidence in a forum of debate. this is what you must grasp. now, an expert would have no trouble presenting evidence/proof as they are well studied on the matter, and therein lies their advantage...knowledge.
Originally posted by PVS
if they are childish, then that is their problem. to assume the worst and use that as your basis for not debating is just as childish as well as unbelievable pompous.
This is in reference to her need to educate others, not in reference to debate.
Originally posted by PVS
'typical' does not belong here. you cannot shrug off the obligation of proof/evidence because some people are deliberate and obnoxious. if that is the case then dont bother posting, because you are certainly not debating. again, a useless circular argument
I was not shrugging off the need for proof. My statement is that her statement is proof until credibly attacked.
Originally posted by PVS
as those who claimed to have achieved the status of "educated" sometimes feel that their bigdickdiploma is all they need in a debate. to hell with proof/evidence to support their claim...discussion...debate.
I do not debate psychological subjects with those that have limited understanding of the field. I don't bother. Given this, if a psychological fact supports my case I will state it as fact, and give support if it is requested. I have never seen Omega "debate" any aspect of physics. She states her knowledge as fact. It is stupid to debate someone on a topic they know little about.
Originally posted by PVS
no, an expert's opinion is an opinion. a more valid opinion perhaps than one who is not as educated, but it is neither proof nor evidence in a forum of debate. this is what you must grasp. now, an expert would have no trouble presenting evidence/proof as they are well studied on the matter, and therein lies their advantage...knowledge.
You have it backwards. I doubt you will concede, and so I am withdrawing from this debate.
Originally posted by Regret
An expert\\\'s opinion is proof/evidence. Her statement is enough until it is credibly attacked. Now if she were to speak on the subject of psychology I would expect her to then provide support because it is not her area of expertise, and when she and I have discussed psychology she has provided support for her beginning arguments.The \\\"pissing contests\\\" occur because someone that is uneducated on the subject and is shown to be wrong will not concede their error. Conceding that one is wrong is the only method for advancing a debate. This is lacking in most cases of knowledge verses opinion.
The biggest problem is with those who believe their authourity to be unquestionable and infallible. Such individuals will go to great lengths arguing how their noted expertise justifies an argument, even when the argument has been proved wrong.
If an individual considers themselves an expert in a particular field, their authourity on a subject can only get them so far. Credible evidence is always needed to support ones opinions. Particularly when posting on a message board under the screen names of Shakyamunison, Regret, or Mr. Ed.
Originally posted by Mr Ed
The biggest problem is with those who believe their authourity to be unquestionable and infallible. Such individuals will go to great lengths arguing how their noted expertise justifies an argument, even when the argument has been proved wrong.If an individual considers themselves an expert in a particular field, their authourity on a subject can only get them so far. Credible evidence is always needed to support ones opinions. Particularly when posting on a message board under the screen names of Shakyamunison, Regret, or Mr. Ed.
What? I think you are just mad at me, and have no real point. 🙄
Originally posted by Bardock42
Elaborate, please.
I have reviewed the rules of the forum. They say nothing about debating tactics or rules of conduct that have to do with proof, evidence, or truthfulness. I may have missed something, so please check the rules and post anything relevant that I may have missed.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I have reviewed the rules of the forum. They say nothing about debating tactics or rules of conduct that have to do with proof, evidence, or truthfulness. I may have missed something, so please check the rules and post anything relevant that I may have missed.
I don't think we are talking about the rules of the forum, though. This is about idiotic debating tactics and in this case what kind of behaviour is necessary to be respected. That has no connection with the rules of this forum.
I find your attempt to undermine this discussion rather childish by the way, if you don't feel like contributing intellectually (which I am sure you could), don't participate at all, please.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't think we are talking about the rules of the forum, though. This is about idiotic debating tactics and in this case what kind of behaviour is necessary to be respected. That has no connection with the rules of this forum.I find your attempt to undermine this discussion rather childish by the way, if you don't feel like contributing intellectually (which I am sure you could), don't participate at all, please.
Is this what you said?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Dude, he does.Evidence is needed when posting on an anonymous Internet debate Forum...like we do.
Prove it.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Is this what you said?Prove it.
Wow...i thought it was pretty clear what was meant, seeing as we talked about it for two pages. Anyways, since I clarified in my last post, you hopefully understand now, or do you want to deny that as well?
Also, I find your attempt to undermine this discussion rather childish, if you don't feel like contributing intellectually (which I am sure you could), don't participate at all, please.