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.


Twitter
Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

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
pic
pic


RSS Jace

Reward Points:5164
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.
94%
Arguments:7444
Debates:16
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

most people, 'left' or otherwise, do not care about racism. if they did then they would do something about it. i doubt that it's even a political weapon in most cases; more like a virtue signal without real conviction.

1 point

asinine argument from a blatant disanalogy. two obvious differences between auto accidents and covid: first, the incidence rates are stable for driving accidents and unstable for pandemic infections which puts different stress on existing infrastructure. second, not driving and wearing a mask are not equally intensive or costly so the comparison ain't analogous (equivalent would be asking why people don't signal their interstate merges).

1 point

ubi would be better

Jace(5164) Clarified
1 point

that's helpful context. i don't agree with your definition of value. you seem instead to be discussing mere preference. to me, value entails preference plus some sort of normative evaluative judgement (i.e. typically some kind of normative belief that represents the preference as being more than the subjective disposition of an individual by allusion to some 'higher' authority, like god or humanity). so when i say i practice value nihilism, that means i reject these kinds of normative appeals and explanations. i'm not denying that preferences exist. and i would approach this issue of pacifism and violence in light of that.

far from neglecting value, i think pacifism is the most value laden (unless we suppose that someone can be equally committed to violence, i.e. to never acting peaceably). it's a normative commitment, against which other inclinations are held. i think it's rarely, if ever, strictly in line with preference (although i can at least theoretically imagine a non-principled pacifist, it's a tall order to imagine them actually existing).

for myself, i allow my preferences towards being violent or non-violent to be as they are in a given moment. im not governed by some general attitude towards violence or non-violence, and especially not by a normative attitude.

Jace(5164) Clarified
1 point

alas, not all of us can be gifted with exciting personalities. that's why there's the seemingness of beer, thank hedons.

Jace(5164) Clarified
2 points

not implausible, although id say im more likely to go for the jugular by denying the self altogether. that's the reason the pubs dont ban me - i generate depressive alcoholics. really, im their cash cow... supposing that cash and cows and pubs exist, of course.

Jace(5164) Clarified
1 point

i am decidedly not a pacifist. why?

Jace(5164) Clarified
1 point

probably ur greatest error in judgment here is in supposing that the bar would be a safe retreat from me. surely id follow the beset neighbor to discuss the matter over pints.

Jace(5164) Clarified
2 points

i dont think that i did, actually. regardless, im sure ive found them lacking on occasion and may well have said as much at those times. but thats not inconsistent with my observations that i find them to be predominantly reasoned and that i generally respect them.

my view of amarel is consistent, despite your baseless speculation that ive adjusted my attitude in response to them patting me on the back (which didn't happen). what has changed in this thread is ur attitude towards me once it became clear that i wasn't going to join ur amarel bashing band wagon.

and no, i mean intellectual relationship. i don't know them well outside of our intellectual discussions, so that's why i delimited the relationship that way. fortunately for amarel and me, ur disdain for vocabularies which exceed ur own really is nothing to do with us.

perhaps u should try chatting with burrito who shares ur aversion to words as well as ur bizarre need to ineffectually dissect a relationship that's nothing to do with u. in any event, im done entertaining ur silly bit of nonsense.

2 points

your desperate need to tear down others to shore up your insecurities is good for an occasional laugh, but that's run its course for the day. laterz.

Displaying 10 most recent debates.

Winning Position: The Ethics of Gender (and Identity)
Winning Position: Does the sacred have intrinsic value?
Winning Position: Yes
Winning Position: What is the appropriate response to ignorance?
Winning Position: No

About Me


Biographical Information
Gender: Fellow
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Other
Country: Vatican City
Websites: Nihilist Owlman

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