1. Intentionally twist any scripture to have less or more than it's intended meaning.
2) Ignore dispensational exgesis and time tested methods of interpretation in favor of JW style single scripture exgesis.
3) Pretend that you are above everyone else in intelligence and knowledge.
4) Pretend that your every statement is factual and there is no room for disagreement.
5) Intimidate your opponent by slander and insult.
6) Use various 'logical' terms to make yourself sound well...logical!
7) Use 'straw man' arguments and generalization to gain an edge from the beginning of the debate.
8) Pretend that science is clearly on your side and that no 'reputable scientist' would disagree with your claims.
9) Have your various allies and followers 'chime in' by attacking your opponent while you work on your response.
10) Above all, pretend that God doesn't exist and that there is no evidence beyond the physical. Make it sound reasonable to believe that all life came from nothing and totally by accident.
Rex
Atheist debate techniques
by Rex B13 28 Replies latest jw friends
-
Rex B13
-
Kent
You should never have accepted that lobothomy, WW.
Yakki Da
Kent
"The only difference between God and Adolf Hitler is that God is more proficient at genocide."
Daily News On The Watchtower and the Jehovah's Witnesses:
http://watchtower.observer.org -
Rex B13
That's "lobotomy", Kent baby.
Does it affect one as much as having one's brain 'pickled' by alcohol and tetracycline?
Yakki Da,
Rex -
logical
6) Use various 'logical' terms to make yourself sound well...logical!
Leave me out of it, I'm NO atheist!
-
Simon
I think any 'technique' to win an argument that is not based on sound reasoning, logic and facts is doomed and should be rejected.
Unfortunately, both creationists and atheists are guilty of doing this at times. It usualluy points to a weak argument.
-
Cygnus
1. Intentionally twist any scripture to have less or more than it's intended meaning.
Interpret the scripture based upon the actual text, not speculation or a priori application.
2) Ignore dispensational exgesis and time tested methods of interpretation in favor of JW style single scripture exgesis.
Demonstrate how such texts contradict other passages in the Bible.
3) Pretend that you are above everyone else in intelligence and knowledge.
Be sure you know what you're talking about.
4) Pretend that your every statement is factual and there is no room for disagreement.
Give evidence for assertions, and stick to the truth of the matter.
5) Intimidate your opponent by slander and insult.
Describe radical fundy characteristics with appropriate terminology.
6) Use various 'logical' terms to make yourself sound well...logical!
Understand logic and apply it sensibly.
7) Use 'straw man' arguments and generalization to gain an edge from the beginning of the debate.
Introduce topics so that even a layperson can understand both sides.
8) Pretend that science is clearly on your side and that no 'reputable scientist' would disagree with your claims.
Produce examples that support your assertions that fundies are completely out to lunch.
9) Have your various allies and followers 'chime in' by attacking your opponent while you work on your response.
Garner support from other reasonable skeptics.
10) Above all, pretend that God doesn't exist and that there is no evidence beyond the physical. Make it sound reasonable to believe that all life came from nothing and totally by accident.
Limit one's self to discussing what can be observed. Admit that origins are a mystery, but provide several good working theories which do not involve miracles or accidents.
-
Scarlet Pimpernel
3) Pretend that you are above everyone else in intelligence and knowledge.
-
No need to pretend -
dedalus
Okay, just for fun, I'll pretend this is worth responding to:
1. Intentionally twist any scripture to have less or more than it's intended meaning.
Look, that's its, not it's. And you really should have started your list with "Harp on things like grammar and spelling instead of addressing the issues ..."
2) Ignore dispensational exgesis and time tested methods of interpretation in favor of JW style single scripture exgesis.
Just so you know, a person can disbelieve the Bible and still believe in God. Atheists are not necessarily anti-Bible, anti-Christian, anti-religion. A discussion of the existence of God need not include the Bible. You're betraying a strong Christian bias here, and in a proper debate, one's bias ought to be suspended.
3) Pretend that you are above everyone else in intelligence and knowledge.
Arguing intelligently and using facts in a debate and demonstrating knowledge is a bad thing now? See #5.
4) Pretend that your every statement is factual and there is no room for disagreement.
When it comes to facts, there is no room for disagreement. Duh! It's the interpretation of facts that's difficult. For example, if I say, "It's 98 degrees outside; man, that's hot," I have, in the first clause, given you an indisputable fact. In the second clause, I've interpreted that fact. You could disagree, pointing out, for example, that compared to the temperature on the surface of Mars, 98 degrees is downright chilly. We would then have to settle semantic issues, set parameters, qualify assumptions, etc. It's complicated, and many people who try to hold onto their faith in the midst of so many qualifications get irritated, as you seem to be here.
5) Intimidate your opponent by slander and insult.
Well, look, people on both sides do that. If atheists tend to be intellectually condescending, those of faith tend to be morally condescending. Whatever.
6) Use various 'logical' terms to make yourself sound well...logical!
Does that include terms like "dispensational exegesis," "'straw man' arguments," "generalization," etc.?
7) Use 'straw man' arguments and generalization to gain an edge from the beginning of the debate.
Hey, you wouldn't be a hypocrite, would you? You know, the very title of this post is a generalization -- "Atheist debate techniques." Or didn't you notice that?
8) Pretend that science is clearly on your side and that no 'reputable scientist' would disagree with your claims.
When the claims are factual and scientific, there's no reason for dispute, unless someone can prove they are untrue and unscientific. When the claims are also logical, there's practically no reason for dispute. See #4.
9) Have your various allies and followers 'chime in' by attacking your opponent while you work on your response.
Look at you, the Lone Ranger of True Believers everywhere! Must be hard for you, cowboy. (Seriously, are you going to tell me that theists never do the same thing? And more to the point, isn't this a discussion board, where all are free to weigh in with their views, opinions, arguments, etc.? Or would you prefer there to be less discussion when you're talking?)
10) Above all, pretend that God doesn't exist and that there is no evidence beyond the physical. Make it sound reasonable to believe that all life came from nothing and totally by accident.
Had a tough time coming up with number ten, did you? An atheist who pretends God doesn't exists is not an atheist, since he covertly believes in God. So what are you trying to say? All atheists are closet theists? Also, you're completely ignorant if you think that atheists believe "that all life came from nothing and totally by accident."
Dedalus
-
Copernicus
This thread should have been more appropriately titled: “Reasons Why Rex Can’t Win A Debate.”
Or alternately: “golly, gosh, gee, dem dang atheists just won’t play fair!!!!!”
By the way ol' buddy, I’m still waiting for the lurid details of your WW to Rex transformation. Did it involve (ouch!) the genitals? I suspect so.
-
Simon
lol dedalus - excellent post !