[Moderator Hat ON]
Hm, criticism of how posters act on the boards should be in the Pit, I think.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
I think the thing to also remember here Bod, is that, in my experience of this board, there is a whole lot of IQ floating around and not always as much EQ.
Then I guess I’ve come home, Mel!
bodswood, I dunno how many debates you’ve ever had online - perhaps you’re just less cynical than I am, but I’ve rarely seen an online debate that is civil, or leads anyone to come to a different conclusion. In fact, the emotional tenor of any online debate, at least one in which the people have particularly vested opinions (like, just as an example, evolution :)) tends to be rather bitter, from what I’ve seen.
That’s why I don’t read the debate forum here very often, and I participate more rarely yet. After all, think of how high emotions run in the now cliché PC vs Mac debate - and the talk of evolution impacts something even deeper than the choice of a computing platform; to many, it’s an issue intimately tied in with their religion. So, people tend to take disagreements as personal attacks, even if they manage to avoid showing it.
What Great Debates does offer, on occasion, is an insightful bit of knowledge that can help me deepen my understanding on a subject. Again, back to the evolution thread, TalkOrigins will hopefully either sway you, or help you deepen and refine your arguments against Darwinian evolution. Finding something like that is, to me, a wonderful thing, because having more knowledge on any issue makes me a more whole person.
But asking for calm, civil debate? It’s not likely to happen. Some people are going to regard you as stupid for having certain opinions (witness the global grudge between certain posters here with differing political views) and you have to ignore them since arguing with them won’t change anyone’s mind. And others are going to take it as an assault on their fundamental beliefs when you disagree with them, and it’s hard to talk with them, too. Debate in a real sense is a very difficult skill to develop (and having studied formal debate, I can say that it’s one step towards developing the ability, but it’s far from enough.) And even if it’s a skill you have, the lesser mortals around you are still going to act like jerks sometimes.
If both sides argue from a truly open perspective, and avoid the use of the rolleyes smiley, there is some room for constructive argument. But even with a fairly smart
crowd like this place has, it’s not gonna happen on a regular basis. But if you want a productive debate here, make sure that you, at least, have that openness, even if the other side doesn’t. Because if you can understand their point of view, and
learn the fundamental argument they’re making, you can at very least rebut it more thoroughly, and make for a more enjoyable fight for the viewing public.
Excalibre, I agree with what you write. The evolution debate has evolved into a more trusting and more robust environment because, I think, those who disagree with me sense that I’m seriously inquisitive. Here am I in a position that I find strange, having been through the educational system (where I did pretty well) and yet NEVER having believed one core plank of modern science and learning. I’m willing to read stuff (even if some of it’s a bit difficult) and perhaps I’m even willing to change my mind. Certainly, no unwillingness to do so will result from my adherence to Christianity, since I’ve had my run-ins with a couple of churches. One was with a Baptist church (I’m not a Baptist but was going to a Baptist church at the time) over the “eternal security of the believer”. I said in all good faith that I didn’t believe in that and they took exception to that. All done in private, but they basically told me I was no longer welcome.
I value unorthodoxy over all else, as Popper put it, “I’m an almost orthodox believer in unorthodoxy”, and like to think I have a passion for the truth. I also enjoy debate and believe I have something to give. It goes without saying that I have much to learn. But, also to quote Popper, I don’t believe in manifest truth, i.e. the idea that it’s out there just waiting to be discovered. All truth is hard won, I believe. But never worth killing or dying over.
As they.
No.
This one caught my eye.
bodswood, in the evolution/faith thread, you mention having done a thesis in sociolinguistics. Didn’t that involve some amount of dealing with “modern science and learning”? I’m not trying to jump on you here, just honestly confused – here in the States, doing a thesis means you’re in graduate school (Masters or PhD), following a 4-year college program (i.e., Bachelor of Arts or Sciences) *after * high school. That’s 6+ years of education past high school – how and why did you go that far in an educational system based on the principles you say you don’t believe in? Or am I missing something?
Really? It made me chuckle. My experience has been that I often over-estimate the intelligence of people in general and I’m continually surprised to find that many people are gullible and uninformed. The “It’s taking longer than we thought” bit struck a chord because of that.
Just as an illustration of the types of ignorance that blow me away, check out [thread=260359]this thread[/thread]. You’ll see a common theme: Urban legend email is forwarded as truth; Doper attempts to educate sender; sender protests, prefers ignorance over fact. Snopes is full of debunkings on things that shouldn’t need to be debunked like the bonsai kitten site mentioned in the previous link, or that the nice Nigerian who emailed you is trying to scam you. Honestly, these things seem like such obvious hoaxes, pranks and scams that I have to stop and wonder why so many people fall for them.
Anyway, from that point of view the tagline is an apt observation of people in general. I don’t see anything offensive or creepy about it.
BTW, I fell for the recent “German couple suffering infertility told to try sex” joke, so I can’t pretend to be superior to anyone else, nor am I as smart as I like to think I am. In fact, I’m just as ignorant as those people who believe that Mariah Carey wants to be Third-World skinny but without the flies and death and stuff.
The dichotomy between those two statements is either scary, or delusional.
:dubious:
You go on believing that you’re not intellectually lazy, then, and I’ll go on patronizing you.
Daniel
It is impossible to avoid patronising the OP in what appear to be joke Pittings. If they actually are Pittings and you ask them if they are joking, they feel like you think their concerns are piddling.
On the other hand if you pretend that they are serious and they are joking, they may feel that you think they have piddling concerns and they don’t.
Joke pittings aren’t allowed, are they?
I think too many people think they are superior to others because they know more, hence the patronising, when in fact we are all ignorant of many things.
Libby, it seems so out of character for you to be smug that I had a hard time convincing myself to write this. But the idea of using “as they” is this circumstance is a silly notion spread by English teachers, the same ones who throw tantrums over split infinitives. It’s a rule that comes from a tortured piece of logic - and throughout history, it’s never been the case that “as they” would be the normal phrasing in English.
Now, while I wouldn’t argue with someone who wrote “as they” in their own writing, your correction is, from a linguistic standpoint, completely, utterly, indefensibly incorrect. It appears to me that you might be offering a ‘correction’ here to try to appear smarter, or to point out some supposed irony in bodswood’s statement. If my guess as to your motives is correct, then I would like to inform you that you’ve failed.
Hey, guys, it’s only evolution I don’t believe in, not the whole of modern science!
You’re not suggesting that evolution somehow underpins modern science, are you?
What is it about evolution that you have difficulty believing?
It’s “hackles”, you ignorant twit. 
What part of “fighting ignorance” do you not understand?
But earlier you wrote:
From that earlier comment it seems that you do indeed take exception to “modern science”.
Do you ever fly in a plane? Man-- that must be tough as hell if you don’t “believe one core plank of modern science.” You think God’s making that thing fly through the air? Witchcraft? Aliens? What, already??