Can you help me debate better?

[Doggey75]

So, I go into a huge debate with a bunch of religious people. I think I started off strong but sucked at the end. Here is the argument http://www.christianforums.com/t7812141/

I was wondering if you can tell me what I can do to improve myself.

[SteelCurtain]

Read. Read. Read. Read. Practice. Read.

---

ETA: Read.

[Little Rik]

So, I go into a huge debate with a bunch of religious people. I think I started off strong but sucked at the end. Here is the argument http://www.christianforums.com/t7812141/
I was wondering if you can tell me what I can do to improve myself.

I gave a quick look into that forum.
Somebody there point out to you that you already made
up your mind.
At the same time they also made up their mind so i can not see
any possible way to help you.
I as a theist i also made up my mind although my view is miles away from
a religious view.
I also try to argue with Christians.
I already knew that i would not convince anybody.
Just for the fun of argue as i do find fun to argue here with atheist.
My suggestion to you is......forget about convincing anybody.
Just argue for the fun and nothing else.


Here you can see my arguing with catholics before they kicked me out.
My name was ricchetto.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=834563

[ManMachine]

So, I go into a huge debate with a bunch of religious people. I think I started off strong but sucked at the end. Here is the argument http://www.christianforums.com/t7812141/

I was wondering if you can tell me what I can do to improve myself.

I am with all of the above posters. read, learn, listen and keep an open mind.

Intelligence is not learning by rote and regurgitating, you need to apply that learning, adapt and sometime be prepared to change your view. Looking at your post you made some fundamental errors;

1. There are no absolute truths, even in the field of scientific endeavour

2. Think very carefully about the position you put yourself in, as much as there is no evidence for the existence of any deity, there is no evidence against the existence of any deity. Your decision to use scientific reasoning as your rationale for the Universe is just as arbitrary as a religious persons' decision to reason a deity as the cause of the Universe. Science is a philosophical discipline not an absolute truth even though to you it might seem like one.

3. Find out what circular reasoning is.

4. Find out what logical fallacies are.

5. Sometimes when you ask the question, 'why do you believe in god' you will get the answer, 'because I do', that's a valid answer. You are in no position to say it is wrong, but you can argue and debate why you believe your own position and why you believe it is a better position but you should not contradict it just for the sake of it.

6. Know your own position on the issues inside and out. Practice debating with other agnostics/atheists, get a wider view of the different types of thinking. Pick your opponents wisely, don't allow yourself to get dragged down into pointless insults and contradiction.

7. Be patient.


MM

[tor]

1. There are no absolute truths, even in the field of scientific endeavour

Then what is the debate about?

[Little Rik]

There are no absolute truths, even in the field of scientific endeavour

How did you work that out?
How do you know that something that can be infinite can be compared with something that we know it is finite like the physical science?

[Alex K]

1. There are no absolute truths, even in the field of scientific endeavour

Especially in the field of scientific endeavour. No, I should better say, there are none, but only science really admits it

---

I can mostly only second what ManMachine says, although I think e's a bit too pessimistic about the limits of the application of science and reason.

Yes, the viewpoint "science and reason are unreliable" is not falsifiable, so there will be no hard proof or logical argument to show otherwise.

The trick in debates is to convince the other side that they really don't want to go down this path. For example because

* inconsistent with what they otherwise believe and how they act, and that they are thus
* throwing out the baby with the bathwater if they deny the foundations of logic and empiricism which you would like them to embrace.


Learn about occam's razor, probabilities and logical fallacies

Learn about the history of religions and belief so you can demonstrate to believers the reasons why most people believe, and why they believe what they believe. You cannot be so presumptuous as to claim to know why your individual opponent believes what they believe, but you can try to make them critically examine their beliefs this way.


Last but very important: do not expect to get an admission that you are right straight away on such fundamental isses, if that is your goal, you are in for needless frustration.

No one will tell you: hey you overthrew my entire worldview in a forum discussion, you are 100% correct and I have lived a lie, thanks again for pointing it out.

---

There are no absolute truths, even in the field of scientific endeavour

How did you work that out?
How do you know that something that can be infinite can be compared with something that we know it is finite like the physical science?

Since the statement "There are no absolute truths" is paradoxical or rather, self-defeating, I suspect what the ManMachine meant is "We do not know whether there are absolute truths" So for all intents and purposes, we do not have any reliable absolute truths. Of course, you can almost say anything and simply define that that is an absolute truth.

[Little Rik]

Since the statement "There are no absolute truths" is paradoxical or rather, self-defeating, I suspect what the ManMachine meant is "We do not know whether there are absolute truths" So for all intents and purposes, we do not have any reliable absolute truths. Of course, you can almost say anything and simply define that that is an absolute truth.

There is a big problem with that WE.
When you say WE you mean everybody which may not be the case.
How do you know that me or anybody else hasn't grasp that truth?
Why do you speak for everybody when in fact you would not know
what other people think or have got?

[Alex K]

There is a big problem with that WE.
When you say WE you mean everybody which may not be the case.
How do you know that me or anybody else hasn't grasp that truth?
Why do you speak for everybody when in fact you would not know
what other people think or have got?

You are correct , as I alluded to in my post, you can even go further than that and simply define anything as the truth. If you don't provide a criterion for what is true and what not, or if you even define it such that there is no other criterion other than your word on it, then that's that. The problem is that you will have used the word truth in a sense which I reject, end of story.

Maybe it is indeed misleading that we keep using the word "truth" without saying what we mean by it, and if we leave that implicit, there can be absolute truths dime a dozen.

[sven]

So, I go into a huge debate with a bunch of religious people. I think I started off strong but sucked at the end. Here is the argument http://www.christianforums.com/t7812141/

I was wondering if you can tell me what I can do to improve myself.

The mistake I often make in discussions is to throw in half-remembered facts and arguments from sources I may not recall. Then I sometimes end up having to apologize and correct myself. This does not look good.
So study your sources of information carefully and remember where you found them, as has been pointed out already.
This is not just important for discussion. You learn a lot too, which is important in life.

Learn to spot people who use master suppression techniques:

"You are 16 years old and obviously have no clue about scripture or the Christian faith. If you want to know what we're all about we'd be happy to share but you have to humble yourself and keep the insults to yourself."

The best way to deal with this in the cloud, in my opinion is to simply ignore people who act like this. Don't respond to them at all I say.