CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

Allies
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


Enemies
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


Hostiles
View All
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic
pic


RSS Jace

Reward Points:4456
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
95%
Arguments:6405
Debates:14
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
0 points

orly

1 point

A single citation would lend your baseless allegations about the character of non-Christians considerably more credibility (by which I mean any).

1 point

No. It also doesn't define anything else...

0 points

How, exactly, can I be certain that I experience?

Honestly, I don't remember the last debate and it seems like you're making the same elementary strawmen anyways so it doesn't look like we ever advanced beyond the preliminaries (in effect at least). If this is uninteresting by virtue of its redundancy then by all means desist. Otherwise you may as well stop bringing up that we've talked about it before.

I am not "pretending" that reason is not proof itself, but thanks for yet another disingenuous representation of my stance that obviates addressing my argument. It is a basic precept of reason that a thing cannot stand as proof of itself. Unless you can articulate why reason should be exempt from its own rule, then it is subject to that rule and therefore cannot be proved by virtue of itself.

My accepting a real life contradiction and watching you reply and not reply is conceptually infeasible to me, but that doesn't disprove my point because my argument is that this conception is not a valid basis for certainty. All it proves is that within our conception non-contradiction is a law; it proves nothing beyond our conception in the least.

Jace(4456) Clarified
1 point

Speech that incites violence is not illegal, but it is not protected. Hate speech is only illegal when it accompanies a crime, at which point the crime becomes charged as a hate crime. (I'm a bit rusty, but I think that's the technical detail of it...).

2 points

Downvoted by prejudice against prejudice against prejudice. Just prejudices all the way down!

2 points

It is entirely rational, because by it's own parameters reason cannot prove itself (nor can it be proved from without itself). If the soundness of reason cannot be established, then the certainty of its conclusions cannot be known. Therefore, we cannot be certain of the law of non-contradiction.

I have never suggested that we seek understanding from outside what we can conceive. Beyond being irrational, that seems impossible. My point is only that from within our conception we cannot have certain knowledge.

Recognizing the uncertainty of the law of non-contradiction, and so also of proof and reason here, does not force one to abandon a belief in or utilization of them. You are hastening to conclusions which in no way follow from the observation.

I do not believe in the impossible, but instead believe that what seems impossible may be possible. That is a critical distinction. By contrast, your view seems to suppose that it is impossible for human conception to be flawed such that reality could be otherwise than we conceive of it. That isn't borne out by either reason or experience, really.

Jace(4456) Clarified
1 point

Speech that incites violence isn't hate speech (at least in the US). It's unprotected speech in its own right, though, so that doesn't really undermine your broader point.

1 point

Any age is fine. Why wouldn't it be? Prejudice is such an irrational state...

1 point

Why can't reality ever be in contradiction with itself at the same time? That's predicated upon a human conception of possibility which cannot be proved.

Displaying 10 most recent debates.

Winning Position: Does the sacred have intrinsic value?
Winning Position: Yes
Winning Position: What is the appropriate response to ignorance?
Winning Position: No
Winning Position: Echidna
Winning Position: No

About Me


Biographical Information
Gender: Chap
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Other
Country: United States
Websites: Nihilist Owlman

Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here