CDZ Intelligence

[Bonzi]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

No, you bible-thumper!

 

[Sonny Clark]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

I've wondered the same thing since day one. But, there're way too many childish idiots on here to have any hope of that ever happening. In addition, the site admin and mods encourage and condone the silly pathetic immature idiot members.

 

[percysunshine]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

Debates commonly argue from both the general to the specific, and from the specific to the general.

Name calling is a ploy to avoid losing a debate point.

.

 

[Moonglow]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

Why, you was hoping for adults here and no children posters?

 

[midcan5]

"...[T]he most important identity we can acknowledge in another person is the identity of being an intelligent reflective human being." Stefan Collini 'That's Offensive'

I have worked as team lead and manager longer than many on USMB have breathed our fine air. Except for certain fields that require a high level of memory and creativity give me a motivated person over an intelligent person any day. Combine the two and you have an excellent worker. But opportunity and luck are important factors too. As America outsources so much work and contractual workers fill the lower spots in the corporate ladder, good jobs diminish. Support American made and buy made here too.

"Although both love and knowledge are necessary, love is in a sense more fundamental, since it will lead intelligent people to seek knowledge, in order to find out how to benefit those whom they love. But if people are not intelligent, they will be content to believe what they have been told, and may do harm in spite of the most genuine benevolence." Bertrand Russell

"Core morality tells us that people have a right to what they earn by their own efforts freely exercised. It is this part of core morality that Ayn Rand objectivists, libertarians, and other right wingers tap into when they insist that taxation is slavery... The trouble with such arguments is that nothing is earned, nothing is deserved. Even if there really were moral rights to the fruit of our freely exercised abilities and talents, these talents and abilities are never freely acquired or exercised. Just as your innate and acquired intelligence and abilities are unearned, so also are your ambitions, along with the discipline, the willingness to train, and other traits that have to be combined with your talents and abilities to produce anything worthwhile at all.... We don't earn our inborn (excuse the expression "God given") talents and abilities. We had nothing to do with whether these traits were conferred on us or not. Similarly, we didn't earn the acquired character traits needed to convert these talents into achievements. They, too, were the result of deterministic processes (genetic and cultural) that were set in motion long before we were born. That is what excludes the possibility that we earned or deserve them. We were just lucky to have the combination of hardwired abilities and learned ambitions that resulted in the world beating a path to our door....No one ever earned or deserved the traits that resulted in the inequalities we enjoy - greater income and wealth, better health and longer life, admiration and social distinction, comfort, and leisure. Therefore, no one, including us, has a moral right to those inequalities. Core morality may permit unearned inequalities, but it is certainly not going to require them without some further moral reason to do so." Alex Rosenberg 'The Atheist's Guide to Reality'

Life in a Parallel Universe US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
The mind works in mysterious ways US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Racism deconstructing the social construct US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

"Racism is not about how you look, it is about how people assign meaning to how you look." Robin D.G. Kelley

 

[rightwinger]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

Not on this board

 

[Liminal]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

Haven't seen it yet.

 

[PredFan]

There is no point. The left will never ever change their minds. It isn't about truth, or logic, or reason with them. Their only concern is winning, and if they have to lie, cheat, abuse, derail, or otherwise confuse the discussion, they will do it.

I just point at them and laugh, everything else is a total waste.

 

[Mac1958]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

It's not easy here.

I think many people here look at this place more as an opportunity for some kind of temporary catharsis, to just be really nasty to others in an effort to feel a bit better about themselves for a while.

But I also suspect there are many who are essentially like this all the time.

.

 

[Wake]

...

Bonzi, intelligence is the acquisition and application of knowledge and skills. It's your ability to absorb and utilize information.

The title of your thread does not match in any way to the content of your post. You should have named it 'civility,' or, if you keep the original title, make a post about actual intelligence. In general, more than some people are not intelligent, and don't really understand what it even is, and think it's something it isn't.

Intelligence in no way equates to being civil and not name-calling. One can be highly intelligent, highly vicious, and highly rude, among many other combinations out there. When you speak of generalization, you may be better off tying it into the concept of 'reasoning.' And for name-calling, 'wisdom.' It is not very wise to call others names, nor is it reasonable to generalize.

Intelligence is not synonymous with name-calling and generalization. These issues are distinct and are far more complicated than we think.

 

[Wake]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

Haven't seen it yet.

We should talk more then.

 

[presonorek]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

Yes. It is very possible to surrender the debate and let the losing debater win by choosing the allowed tactics.

In debates you usually use the tactics that work whether the opponent approves or not. Debate is war. If you can convince multitudes to think your way by using generalizations and name calling then you should use generalizations and name calling.

If those tactics are bad and harmful then you shouldn't be whining. You are obviously winning every argument if those are such bad tactics.

 

[Wake]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

Yes. It is very possible to surrender the debate and let the losing debater win by choosing the allowed tactics.

In debates you usually use the tactics that works whether the opponent approves or not. Debate is war. If you can convince multitudes to think your way by using generalizations and name calling then you should.

The problem with that bit of thinking is that it assumes debate is just a game, where one side wins and one side loses.

I suspect few people are actually interested in a meaningful discussion they actually share their ideas honestly, without arguing with each other, as if there are points to win.

If debate is neither honest nor fair, what is the point of it? As for your last line, that's the thinking of a politician, and a lot of people hate politicians because time and again they're shameless liars who manipulate the stupid masses.

 

[presonorek]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

I've wondered the same thing since day one. But, there're way too many childish idiots on here to have any hope of that ever happening. In addition, the site admin and mods encourage and condone the silly pathetic immature idiot members.

What is wrong? Does this website not allow you to silence your opponents by flagging their post and crying to the admins about your hurt feelings?

I personally think your opponents should be allowed to talk too. It shouldnt just be your opinions and an amen corner.

 

[Bonzi]

suspect few people are actually interested in a meaningful discussion they actually share their ideas honestly, without arguing with each other, as if there are points to win

This!

 

[presonorek]

There is no point. The left will never ever change their minds. It isn't about truth, or logic, or reason with them. Their only concern is winning, and if they have to lie, cheat, abuse, derail, or otherwise confuse the discussion, they will do it.

I just point at them and laugh, everything else is a total waste.

I thought winning hearts and minds to your point of view was the purpose of debate.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

There is no point. The left will never ever change their minds. It isn't about truth, or logic, or reason with them. Their only concern is winning, and if they have to lie, cheat, abuse, derail, or otherwise confuse the discussion, they will do it.

I just point at them and laugh, everything else is a total waste.

Ironic post.

Did you do that on purpose?

 

[Bonzi]

There is no point. The left will never ever change their minds. It isn't about truth, or logic, or reason with them. Their only concern is winning, and if they have to lie, cheat, abuse, derail, or otherwise confuse the discussion, they will do it.

I just point at them and laugh, everything else is a total waste.

I thought winning hearts and minds to your point of view was the purpose of debate.

Maybe debate and intelligence don't belong together....
I think (IMHO) that an "intelligent debate" should be won without generalizations (which would/should be called out) and CERTAINLY without name calling, and subtle wording used to make people think negatively of the other person. Just the FACTS! Make your case with FACTS, not psychology....

If that's not "debate", well, I guess it's just discussion and Wake was correct in his post .....

 

[Sonny Clark]

Is it POSSIBLE to have a debate without generalizing and name calling?

Just wondering!

I've wondered the same thing since day one. But, there're way too many childish idiots on here to have any hope of that ever happening. In addition, the site admin and mods encourage and condone the silly pathetic immature idiot members.

What is wrong? Does this website not allow you to silence your opponents by flagging their post and crying to the admins about your hurt feelings?

I personally think your opponents should be allowed to talk too. It shouldnt just be your opinions and an amen corner.

Pleeeeeeeez ... really? .......... obviously you're reading way more into what I said that was actually there. ............ that is so silly, honestly. You missed the point completely.