Let's pit Dopers who engage in debate with Starving Artist

[lissener]

@Starving_Artist

Take teen pregnancy figures, for instance. Given HIPPA and privacy laws and the teenage propensity for embarrassment and/or shame over getting pregnant (and/or getting abortions), I strongly suspect a great many girls get pregnant and no one ever knows about it or the information is confidential and protected. Yet someone around here will post some claim from somewhere that says teen pregnancy is down (what was that school in Chicago again where one in every eight girls is pregnant?) and everyone jumps on it like manna from heaven in order to claim that my claim has been unqestionably refuted.

You are a fucking idiot.

[lissener]

@Starving_Artist

And then you have the gall to call me unenlightened. With enlightenment like you’ve wrought, who needs enemies?

You are a fucking idiot.

[Starving_Artist]

@lissener

You are a fucking idiot.

Okay then, smart guy. How’s about you tell us how all this shit just happened to spring up on its own – coincidentally starting at the same time as the counter-culture revolution of the late sixties.

If I wanted to take the time I could write a detailed chronology explaining how all this has transpired, step by step, and you would still claim that the right thing was being done every step of the way and that each of the negative consequences I just described (and there are more) “just happened” through no fault of your own.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Starving_Artist

Or where criminals in their twenties and thirties with a dozen or more convictions under their belt are roaming the streets shooting and stabbing and raping people.

Thank God Roe v Wade came along in '73 or you’d have a lot more of 'em.

[BigT]

Meh. SA has his good qualities and bad qualities, just like the rest of you. I’ve gotten as angry at his unreasonableness as anyone else’s. I’ve seen people with legitimate and illegitimate problems with him.

He gets angry (and let’s it show) too easily. He argues things that are unimportant. He acts like he’s being maligned in threads where that isn’t the point, but, as he’s one that gets pitted a lot, that’s not surprising.

In other words, I have yet to find anything particularly bad about him. He’s yet another Doper who has a fixed view of the world, and is not interested in changing it.

So, yeah, it’s stupid to debate him, but there are a lot of people even in this thread that I feel the same way about. Heck, this post isn’t even gonna change anyone’s mind.

[Harborwolf]

@Starving_Artist

So American society is defined these day by the breakdown of the family unit, rampant STD rates, crimes committed by people who ought to be in jail, widespread drug use and addiction, high school graduates who couldn’t have passed the fifth grade in the fifties; etc., etc., etc.

No. You define american society by these things.

[Kal]

@Starving_Artist

Unless you call a couple of generations of people who don’t know the difference between ‘there,’ ‘their’ and ‘they’re,’ or ‘your’ and ‘you’re’ and who think every word that ends in “s” takes an apostrophe.

Ahem.

@Starving_Artist

Still, your damn right I never experienced the Enlightenment.

Peoples’ lives are lost …

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

@Starving_Artist

But, but…what about my being wrong because I’m on the other side? That’s what you said.

You people slay me. You make stupid revealing accusations without being aware of it, and then when you’re real meaning is tossed back at you, you claim you meant something else entirely.

Yet I’m the one who’s dishonest. :rolleyes:

Starving— you predicament, it seems to me, is that you can never, ever, back off the party line, (by that I mean YOUR line-- not a specific political party). It is always a broken record with no honest give and take. Most every political extremist on this Board is able to at least sometimes back down and admit at least a partial faux pas. You do not that that. Ever. That is what invites pit thread such as this.

Stick to your beliefs, good fellow, but be man enough to admit when you are wrong

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

@Shodan

A board whose members are so quick to call SA names but usually decline to do the same with people like Der Trihs and Diogenes the Cynic and the various other clowns, buffoons, assholes and dolts who drool out of the left side of their mouths is not a board whose judgment needs to be taken with much seriousness.n

Thing about Der Trihs is he just goes too far with rhetoric sometimes. I, for one, can usually see the actual point he is making through the hyperbole, Sometimes it is a but much, but usually the point is still there.

[Der_Trihs]

@mhendo

In my experience, Der Trihs’s only real area of complete irrationality and unwillingness to consider alternative views is in the area of religion. I think he’s far too dismissive and dishonest in debates over religion.

I am not dishonest. And I fail to see how it’s even possible to be too dismissive of religion.

As for people complaining that right wingers are getting the short end of the stick? Well; that’s because the positions of the right wing are much more likely to be factually wrong or baseless. They don’t fare well in any discussion where such things as facts and logic are taken seriously, outside of the right wing echo chamber. Both sides are not equal.

[pseudotriton_ruber_ruber]

Love this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Starving Artist
Unless you call a couple of generations of people who don’t know the difference between ‘there,’ ‘their’ and ‘they’re,’ or ‘your’ and ‘you’re’ and who think every word that ends in “s” takes an apostrophe.

Ahem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starving Artist
Still, your damn right I never experienced the Enlightenment.

Peoples’ lives are lost …

[CircleofWillis]

@elucidator

Since you are committed to resisting change to your last breath, one can hardly blame you.

…ahem…

@Der_Trihs

I am not dishonest. And I fail to see how it’s even possible to be too dismissive of religion.

As for people complaining that right wingers are getting the short end of the stick? Well; that’s because the positions of the right wing are much more likely to be factually wrong or baseless. They don’t fare well in any discussion where such things as facts and logic are taken seriously, outside of the right wing echo chamber. Both sides are not equal.

…and Starving Artist gets the pitting?

[Der_Trihs]

@CircleofWillis

…and Starving Artist gets the pitting?

And how is what I said worth a pitting?

[Bricker]

@Princhester

I had an exchange with SA which (paraphrasing) went basically like this: He inferred something based on his personal experience. I pointed to a book containing actual studies of the phenomenon in question which showed he was wrong, or at least his personal experience was atypical. He said words to the effect of: “who am I going to believe, my own eyes or some book?”. If he’d said that he had a counterstudy, or pointed out holes in the study, that would be fine. But he didn’t. As I said at the time, he is a person for whom the Enlightenment never happened. He doesn’t accept research, he just accepts that however he feels or whatever his experience has been is How It Is and he simply isn’t able to accept that the world has moved on (and for the better) to the point where we have tools and techniques for study of things that are simply better than the confining walls of one’s own experience.

If this is the yardstick, then Diogenes the Cynic is perhaps the worst offender on the boards. He will do precisely what you’ve described: dogmatically stake out a position based on his own experience, and Moses coming down from the mountain would be hard-pressed to budge him.

Now, it’s true that he’s gotten Pitted for this, but he gets nowhere near the level of vitriol that’s directed at SA on a regular basis. And why?

Sorry, but this is crap, and if you (and any number of other conservatives who have posted in this thread) think slamming SA is just a generic slam on conservatives, or that he’s only being pitted because he’s conservative, frankly you are doing yourself a disservice by putting yourself at his level.

THIS is why. He doesn’t get the same level of hate because for the most part, politically, he’s in step with the board… and the areas he gets the most hate are when he offers up an opinion that’s out of step.

Now, I didn’t offer up his name initially because he’s a generally good debater: when he’s debating a position on which reasonable people may disagree, he’s able to forcefully and effectively articulate the merits of his position. But when he picks an utterly unsupportable point to defend, he’s unwilling or barely willing to abandon it even in the face of multiple definitive cites to the contrary.

[Shodan]

No he doesn’t. Everyone else is wrong, and he is right.

Regards,
Shodan

[El_Kabong]

@Starving_Artist

And now here we have yet another well-worn and dishonest Doper tactic (and poster). Rather than meet an argument head on, people like elucidator sometimes try the sideways tactic of marginalizing or dismissing a poster or his points by trying to make them look silly, hidebound or not worthy of listening to for some other reason.

But in fact you ARE rather silly, hidebound and not worthy of listening to. Just pointing that out so there’s no confusion on this point.

I’m always cheered when people like elucidator stoop to these tactics though, because it means that when it comes to a substantive challenge to the points I’ve made, they got nothin’.

Not to mention allowing you to avoid facing the bitter truth that you are something of a laughingstock around here.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Bricker

THIS is why. He doesn’t get the same level of hate because for the most part, politically, he’s in step with the board… and the areas he gets the most hate are when he offers up an opinion that’s out of step.

Now, I didn’t offer up his name initially because he’s a generally good debater: when he’s debating a position on which reasonable people may disagree, he’s able to forcefully and effectively articulate the merits of his position. But when he picks an utterly unsupportable point to defend, he’s unwilling or barely willing to abandon it even in the face of multiple definitive cites to the contrary.

It may be comforting to you to think about Starving Artist being somehow equivalent to Diogenes. However, I really have to ask if you honestly believe that the two posters have the same regard for empiricism.

Also, I would point to your recent gotcha ya GD thread about absentee ballot fraud in the primary of the Working Families Party in Troy, NY as evidence that we are all not immune to the problems of staking out an indefensible position and sticking our fingers in our ears when contradictory observations are made. IIRC, you in fact never answered my questions on the subject at all.

[Princhester]

@Bricker

If this is the yardstick, then Diogenes the Cynic is perhaps the worst offender on the boards. He will do precisely what you’ve described: dogmatically stake out a position based on his own experience, and Moses coming down from the mountain would be hard-pressed to budge him.

I don’t really know DtC that well and am not in a postion to either defend or attack him with any force. I do recall him being like this on occasion and thinking he was being a dick.

I do think that it’s a bit (OK, very) telling that much (indeed close to all) of the attempts at a defence of SA in this thread comprise basically “Hey, other people are shitforbrains also” and “you criticise him primarily because he’s conservative”.

The first attempt is true, but as a defence - pathetic and irrelevant. The second is just attacking motivations which is not an argument.

Now, it’s true that he’s gotten Pitted for this, but he gets nowhere near the level of vitriol that’s directed at SA on a regular basis. And why?

I think you need to read your own post more carefully. Particularly this:

Now, I didn’t offer up his name initially because he’s a generally good debater: when he’s debating a position on which reasonable people may disagree, he’s able to forcefully and effectively articulate the merits of his position. But when he picks an utterly unsupportable point to defend, he’s unwilling or barely willing to abandon it even in the face of multiple definitive cites to the contrary.

Does it occur to you that a poster who is generally a good debater but who sometimes won’t abandon stupid positions despite cites might just get pitted less than a moron who doesn’t even appear to understand the concept of research or study or cites?

[Sevastopol]

Nevermind

[Bricker]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

It may be comforting to you to think about Starving Artist being somehow equivalent to Diogenes. However, I really have to ask if you honestly believe that the two posters have the same regard for empiricism.

That’s a tough question. In the end, i would say that Diogenes has more regard for empiricism than Starving Artist. SA has acknowledged his purpose is not to debate, but simply offer a contrasting view. DtC, at least ostensibly, remains open to convincing, although in practice it is practically impossible. As i said before, DtC is clearly a more accomplished debater, and in that respect he has more “regard for empiricism” than SA does. But he has effectively zero regard for it when its results run counter to a point he has decided to defend.

So it’s a close call, not remotely the sort of runaway victory I suspect you imagined when asking the question. But I will concede that ultimately the answer is yes, DtC has more regard for empiricism than SA does.

Also, I would point to your recent gotcha ya GD thread about absentee ballot fraud in the primary of the Working Families Party in Troy, NY as evidence that we are all not immune to the problems of staking out an indefensible position and sticking our fingers in our ears when contradictory observations are made. IIRC, you in fact never answered my questions on the subject at all.

Frankly, I didn’t answer your question because it seemed blindingly obvious to me, and because I was convinced that most readers, having read my OP and your response, would not need me to spell out that which was inferentially obvious. However, I have now answered it. Feel free to prod me by PM or by additional posts if this situation comes up again and you feel I’m ignoring a question in an effort to dodge it.