Agruing

Agruing (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

MarkC -> Agruing (5/31/2007 5:25:46 AM)
When I was young, one of the excersises that my father made me do, was to argue something from a point of view I didn't have or couldn't have.(ie menstrual cycles make it worse to be a woman than to be a man) I found the exercise enjoyable and helpful. I was hoping some of you wouldn't mind giving me a side to argue. Please be clear about it. Just because you tell me a story about a single mother eating coconuts for lunch doesn't tell me what I'm arguing. Maybe I should have a problem with single mothers, or lunchs, or heck eating coconuts is EVIL! hehe I simply want it clear what point of view I'm arguing. My father used the tag line "Now convince me that I should "blah blah" if you could put that at the end of your post I would apprecaite it. Also I don't care about grammer and spelling that much. If it's OCD important to you then this won't be an enjoyable thread for you. Also please don't ask me to agrue something uninteresting. Eating Coconuts as evil would be a good example of that. And lastly no politics, I simply don't care enough about them to be informed enough to argue about them. Thanks in advance, Mark

murmur -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 5:35:54 AM)
so this is a thread of arguing...about arguing? maybe you could give out interests of matter that does interests you...?

LadyEllen -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 5:41:10 AM)
(noting you list agnosticism as one of your loves/likes) Convince me as to how and why we can know God/the supreme divine presence/whatever one wishes to call it, intimately as to nature and how and why we can and must strive to know in order to escape this world. As a gnostic, I shall be grading you accordingly... E

ennaozzie -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 5:42:15 AM)
You would really argue about something even if you dont agree with it ay? Yes its a good way to try and get the others point of view, not saying you have to agree but it helps i guess see where they are comeing from even if you dont agree. Ok here is a subject what say you argue that on line is better than off line when it comes to D/s BDSM what are the pros and cons? pretend you think on line is better, even if you dont agree or maybe you do. Is that what you where talking about when asking for subjects? Do they all have to be D/s BDSM related? I know you mentioned none related subjects in your post but i did not know if you used them just as examples or if you did not mind any subject even if not related to this site. I will pop back sometimes and see how its going, its a good idea. beanie[sm=dance.gif]

CuriousLord -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 5:58:54 AM)
It's a very useful skill to have. An ability to debate far above the heads of others is paramount to an ability to control. If they should do as you want them to, you simply argue for it. If they shouldn't, for the sake of their own interests, you can just argue the false point- if they're not on your level, they're still beguiled. Go manipulation!

mnottertail -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 6:06:50 AM)
Having studied (and ultimately failed) the argument constructions of philosopy, I will also point out that debating beneath peoples level is very effectual. I mean, I can premise alot of shit on the fuck you aspect and wither people. Ron

Real0ne -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 8:00:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Having studied (and ultimately failed) the argument constructions of philosopy, I will also point out that debating beneath peoples level is very effectual. I mean, I can premise alot of shit on the fuck you aspect and wither people. Ron posting maxwells equations works pretty well too LOL

farglebargle -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 8:01:11 AM)
I disagree most strongly!

mnottertail -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 8:02:33 AM)
with maxwell's equations? Ron

Real0ne -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 8:03:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle I disagree most strongly! no one will look lol

popeye1250 -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 9:44:25 AM)
Mark, how about a science argument? Convice me that global warming is not due to increased solar activity.

domiguy -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 9:47:17 AM)
Mark, How a bout a debate over the Domidong? You argue in favor as to why all the women on CM should want to deep throat as well as be anally introduced to the Domidong and I will argue the contrary.

philosophy -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 9:49:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Mark, how about a science argument? Convice me that global warming is not due to increased solar activity. Would that be all global warming or just some of it? And if you mean all of it, why let volcanoes off so easily?

MarkC -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 9:50:00 AM)
LadyEllen - To convince her of why we should know his presence in order to escape this world. Deep within you there is a longing to be a part of something greater. You look around and know that there must be more to this world than what you see. And there is a divine plan. Although you may not be able to understand it, as even I am not able to understand it all. You have the validation that there is something more already planted within you. The earth seems cruel to you, unfair maybe have you ever wonder why this is? Read the Bible and you will see that God tests us, but don't despair your time of testing will be short indeed in comparision to eternity you'll face if you pass. . . or if you fail. ennaozzie - To convice her that online BDSM is better than offline (real life) BDSM. [ya the topics don't have to be BDSM] BDSM is about fantasies, desires which you have, and want to fulfill. Is there any better medium to live out a fantasy than in your imgnaition? I'm sure you felt what it was like to have a fantasy that you actually tried that flopped offline. Tell me now that you've had this happen online? Offline you must be the person you are, online you can live a role you fantasys about. Online I can know what it's like to be treated as woman if I chose, or gay. I can delve into these fantasies completely safe. I can enjoy them repeatly and they will always turn out the way I see it in my minds eye. If nothing else convinces you fear should, let me leave you with this question. Have you ever met anyone who has been raped online?

mnottertail -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 11:14:16 AM)
Have you ever met anyone who has been raped online? By the thousands, that is why they got collars of protection and am I the only one and is this normal and are all Doms like this. But enough of this folderal, let's stay on topic..... Domidong is the point under discussion, I believe. Ron

philosophy -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 11:58:36 AM)
"Domidong is the point under discussion, I believe." ...Domidong's point, surely?

NeedToUseYou -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 12:11:53 PM)
edited to remove part of a sentence that made no sense. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen (noting you list agnosticism as one of your loves/likes) Convince me as to how and why we can know God/the supreme divine presence/whatever one wishes to call it, intimately as to nature and how and why we can and must strive to know in order to escape this world. As a gnostic, I shall be grading you accordingly... E Raises hand I want to try. I'm agnostic to though. This is all going to be either assumption, or loosely known facts. LOL. First most of the values set in our universe must be set within a narrow range for the universe to ever be able to form. If gravity was weaker, the stars wouldn't be able to hold together. If you research it, if any of the constants of the universe were off by more than a few percent or less, it just wouldn't hold together in a manner that would be stable. I have seen the probability of these being random before, and the number was insurmoutably huge. So, the assumption is something, or someone is controlling the constants. Why else would all of them fall into range perfectly? So, whether it is God, or something outside our universe that is unintelligent controlling the very constants that make the universe for all effective purposes exist in a coherent manner as opposed to nothing but particles or nothing but massive black holes for example. It would seem given the choices, it's either random chance which would make 1 in a million look like good odds, an unintelligent mechanism outside our universe, or an intelligent entity. Given that these constants would seem to require intelligence to figure out which would produce a "usable" universe, it seems an intelligent being would be the most logical assumption. Also, given the assumption that the universe started as a single point or close enough. Then why did that point explode? What variable changed in the equation that suddenly made it explode when there was nothing according to science that could have caused a change, since obviously the whole of the universe was scrunched to a spec. If the big bang assumption is true, and evidence supports it. Then which is more logical. A. That the point was there for billions of years(always actually)then just went "oh, I'm going to explode even though nothing changed" B. Something changed and caused an impact on the point, if so that must of been from "outside" what we call the universe. Thus functioning on a different level of existance. This assumes that the point or near point of matter/energy was always there, since if it wasn't then it must have come from somewhere else, and if it came from something else, now not entwined in the universe in an observable manner, Then the implication is that there must be another plane of existance, or universe. Why must you believe in God? Well, if you rationalize that given the same parameters you will recieve the same results, then something must of intervened to cause the big bang to begin with. Why would something change for no reason? It doesn't. So, that would mean, that something or someone acted to cause it, and upon causing a change, set the constants in place as well. .

MarkC -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 12:19:11 PM)
Popeye - To be convinced that Global Warming isn't do to solar activity People always seem to want to blame the sun or something other than themselves for the problems of our world. We don't want to admit that what we do on this planet effects the planet as a whole. If you don't believe that what we do creates heat then you should have no problem standing in a man made forest fire. Burning coal, gas, and even nuclearer reaction all produce tons of heat. Where do you think that heat goes? Do you think that all the machinary and energy production that creates heat has no effect on our world? I know it's large, but the scale of our heat production is MASSIVE. We need to take responsiblity of our actions and work to lower our output, before the increased temp comes back to bite us in the ass. Domiguy - ROFL To be convinced that all the woman on collerme.com want to deep throat him and let him do them anally. All men know that woman secretly fantasy about men's gentials. They may pretend on this site that they are lesbian but they really just need an introduction to a man who really knows how to treat a woman. It's hardwired into their bodys to yearn for the penitration of a man, hell even when they are with just woman they use a fake man to please themselves. Now after saying that I'll take it a step further. If a woman is on CM they don't want just most men can provide, they want to suck it, and feel it penitrate in places new and exciting. I know they fear that they won't be able to take it all in, but all they really need is to be taught. It's not they don't want to (because they do) it's because they are scared they can't handle it. (which they can) So stop suppressing your true desires, and pretending things you know aren't true. Ladies open up to the many possiblities of the Domidong. mnottertail - More on online rape I'm sure you'll agree that to roleplay rape is not at all the same thing as to be raped. Online no one can physically force you to do something sexual you don't want to do. There is a choice, you chose to leave your computer hooked up and you chose to check your emails. Getting knocked unconsious, kidnapped, bound, gagged and sexually assaulted against your wish can happen in real life, it simply isn't possible online though.

MarkC -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 12:28:48 PM)
NeedToUseYou - To be convinced there there isn't a (highly technical) god Just so I understand your point of view. You belive that there was a complex highly intelligent and highly powerful being which created something very basic and simple. And because the simple stuff became more advanced you believe that proves that it required something complex highly intelligent and highly powerful to create anything complex. . . . Like a complex highly intelligent and highly powerful being? If the random events are so rare and prove that happensance didn't create the universe then, what happenstance created complex highly intelligent and highly powerful being?

NeedToUseYou -> RE: Agruing (5/31/2007 12:39:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarkC NeedToUseYou - To be convinced there there isn't a (highly technical) god Just so I understand your point of view. You belive that there was a complex highly intelligent and highly powerful being which created something very basic and simple. And because the simple stuff became more advanced you believe that proves that it required something complex highly intelligent and highly powerful to create anything complex. . . . Like a complex highly intelligent and highly powerful being? If the random events are so rare and prove that happensance didn't create the universe then, what happenstance created complex highly intelligent and highly powerful being? No I believe simple objects can form complex objects, everything works that way. What I'm saying is the Constants, that govern such things as gravity, magnetism, the nuclear forces, etc.. are all set perfectly to allow the formation of the universe. If like I said gravity was weaker the stars wouldn't form, the gas would simply drift. This like that. I'm not even speaking at a biological level, but rather the core make up of the universe itself, exists as it does instead of particles floating randomly in the vast empty space unable to hold together because gravity or other attractive forces were to weak. I've watched programs on this and the assumption that these type of constants "must" be the values they are is not founded with any evidence. So, since they could be different values, the question becomes how come they all are perfectly set to creat the most stable universe. To answer your question were did god or the being come from. It doesn't matter what created the being, because the being exists outside our universe. The question posed was our universe in relation to god. It is impossible to explain where god would come from in this context, because we don't have access to his domain.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125