There's a major flaw in DebateCraft | Forum

#1

I recently created a debate on the topic "Hinduism has many problems and its removal is beneficial for society" I got an opponent who doesn't seem to make any sense at all. Because, 1. He isn't Indian, that's fine. 2. He isn't a Hindu, still fine, he could have collected some information through the internet. 3. He didn't do that too.

My problem is, why did a Guy who has no knowledge about a topic engage in a discussion regarding that topic. He wasn't aware of anything(baba culture, Misogynistic texts, even the texts). It puts the burden of proving a concept exists before proving the problem with the concept. I had to explain several times that The Godmen are Powered by the religious scriptures and the Scriptures can only be interpret by the Godmen. But he refused to believe his feelings over facts. Now you can't really expect me to explain something that fundamental by merely writing. I was seriously pissed off when he said that Atheists will hate humanity, People just need a reason to hate others and stuff. He was literally justifying burning of women. He justified forcing women to cover. I wanted to forfeit the debate but that would have been bad for my id. I know that there's a feature to pick a particular opponent and set a minimum opponent rating, but I don't think picking an opponent forcefully is a Good Choice, or even setting a minimum opponent rating there will be people who lack knowledge of the topic.

I think that there should be a system where every member has their area of expertise in a particular section. Like, in my case it can be. Theism(I am best at it), South Asian Geopolitics(I have read a book on this topic alone), Indian Law(I have knowledge of most Indian Laws), Morality(No Degree on Philosophy but ig basic maths works), and other areas I know a lot about, Chess(1500 elo), Science(Bio Upto Senior level, PCM upto senior secondary level), Knowledge of Technology(currently in a CSE program), knowledge of cryptography and cybersecurity. Anime(watched more than 40, started watching at age 11 anime wasn't even popular here in India back then.) Ag

See, if any person has to start a debate, there can be some feature which can feature my id to him, if my areas of expertise has anything matching

Edit comment

Mentions Text*

I recently created a debate on the topic "Hinduism has many problems and its removal is beneficial for society" I got an opponent who doesn't seem to make any sense at all. Because, 1. He isn't Indian, that's fine. 2. He isn't a Hindu, still fine, he could have collected some information through the internet. 3. He didn't do that too.My problem is, why did a Guy who has no knowledge about a topic engage in a discussion regarding that topic. He wasn't aware of anything(baba culture, Misogynistic texts, even the texts). It puts the burden of proving a concept exists before proving the problem with the concept. I had to explain several times that The Godmen are Powered by the religious scriptures and the Scriptures can only be interpret by the Godmen. But he refused to believe his feelings over facts. Now you can't really expect me to explain something that fundamental by merely writing. I was seriously pissed off when he said that Atheists will hate humanity, People just need a reason to hate others and stuff. He was literally justifying burning of women. He justified forcing women to cover. I wanted to forfeit the debate but that would have been bad for my id. I know that there's a feature to pick a particular opponent and set a minimum opponent rating, but I don't think picking an opponent forcefully is a Good Choice, or even setting a minimum opponent rating there will be people who lack knowledge of the topic. I think that there should be a system where every member has their area of expertise in a particular section. Like, in my case it can be. Theism(I am best at it), South Asian Geopolitics(I have read a book on this topic alone), Indian Law(I have knowledge of most Indian Laws), Morality(No Degree on Philosophy but ig basic maths works), and other areas I know a lot about, Chess(1500 elo), Science(Bio Upto Senior level, PCM upto senior secondary level), Knowledge of Technology(currently in a CSE program), knowledge of cryptography and cybersecurity. Anime(watched more than 40, started watching at age 11 anime wasn't even popular here in India back then.) Ag See, if any person has to start a debate, there can be some feature which can feature my id to him, if my areas of expertise has anything matching

#2

Did you think there arent other hibdus like Sri Lankans and Nepalese?

Indias just the biggest one.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

The US is a definitively secular nation, founded on complete separation of the State and religion. The Left Wing of US realise this but don't realise that pure freedom requires as low tax and free access to guns as possible. The Right Wing of US don't realise that secular pure freedom means the LGBTQ+ and abortion agendas both end up in line with US's liberty-first ethos.

It is left-wing to be pro-life. You are backing poor babies being born at the inconvenience of the already-born. Go figure.

#3

@GajarMooli

GajarMooli wrote:

My problem is, why did a Guy who has no knowledge about a topic engage in a discussion regarding that topic.

I'm afraid that is something you'll deal with more often than not anymore.

I blame the internet, so many clueless people think that just because they can Google it and find a fact, that they are experts. Maybe they can look up some facts, but they have no idea how the facts fit together, a collection of facts doesn't mean you understand the subject, but many Google Scholars think it makes them experts. The internet has dumbed everyone down, and there is a mountain of superficial knowledge out there.

I think that there should be a system where every member has their area of expertise in a particular section. Like, in my case it can be. Theism(I am best at it), South Asian Geopolitics(I have read a book on this topic alone), Indian Law(I have knowledge of most Indian Laws), Morality(No Degree on Philosophy but ig basic maths works), and other areas I know a lot about, Chess(1500 elo), Science(Bio Upto Senior level, PCM upto senior secondary level), Knowledge of Technology(currently in a CSE program), knowledge of cryptography and cybersecurity. Anime(watched more than 40, started watching at age 11 anime wasn't even popular here in India back then.) Ag

It's a matter of how the internet has changed society, it's unrealistic to expect this web site to be able to fix it,

See, if any person has to start a debate, there can be some feature which can feature my id to him, if my areas of expertise has anything matching

I read your debate, damn man, you are talking some serious detail from an insider perspective. I have studied comparative religions for decade, probably my favorite is Hinduism, I have strong opinions, I think you are wrong, but I don't think I'd be able to mount a credible discussion with you considering the depth and detail of your knowledge.

When I say I think you are wrong, I'm not even getting past your title, but what the heck, here is my contention to your "Hinduism has many problems and its removal is beneficial for society", It's my understanding that Hinduism is not just a religion in India, it's a way of life that is embedded in every aspect of Indian culture and life. If that is true, then I think "it's removal" is impossible.

It also appears that you are a literalist, I didn't think there were any literalists, what's up with that?

Edit post

Mentions Text*

<blockquote><a href="https://www.debatecraft.com/forum/c/debatecraft/posts/13q/theres-a-major-flaw-in-debatecraft" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">GajarMooli wrote:</a></blockquote><blockquote> </blockquote><blockquote>My problem is, why did a Guy who has no knowledge about a topic engage in a discussion regarding that topic. </blockquote> I'm afraid that is something you'll deal with more often than not anymore. I blame the internet, so many clueless people think that just because they can Google it and find a fact, that they are experts. Maybe they can look up some facts, but they have no idea how the facts fit together, a collection of facts doesn't mean you understand the subject, but many Google Scholars think it makes them experts. The internet has dumbed everyone down, and there is a mountain of superficial knowledge out there. <blockquote>I think that there should be a system where every member has their area of expertise in a particular section. Like, in my case it can be. Theism(I am best at it), South Asian Geopolitics(I have read a book on this topic alone), Indian Law(I have knowledge of most Indian Laws), Morality(No Degree on Philosophy but ig basic maths works), and other areas I know a lot about, Chess(1500 elo), Science(Bio Upto Senior level, PCM upto senior secondary level), Knowledge of Technology(currently in a CSE program), knowledge of cryptography and cybersecurity. Anime(watched more than 40, started watching at age 11 anime wasn't even popular here in India back then.) Ag</blockquote> It's a matter of how the internet has changed society, it's unrealistic to expect this web site to be able to fix it, <blockquote>See, if any person has to start a debate, there can be some feature which can feature my id to him, if my areas of expertise has anything matching</blockquote> I read your debate, damn man, you are talking some serious detail from an insider perspective. I have studied comparative religions for decade, probably my favorite is Hinduism, I have strong opinions, I think you are wrong, but I don't think I'd be able to mount a credible discussion with you considering the depth and detail of your knowledge. When I say I think you are wrong, I'm not even getting past your title, but what the heck, here is my contention to your "Hinduism has many problems and its removal is beneficial for society", It's my understanding that Hinduism is not just a religion in India, it's a way of life that is embedded in every aspect of Indian culture and life. If that is true, then I think "it's removal" is impossible. It also appears that you are a literalist, I didn't think there were any literalists, what's up with that?

#4

@GajarMooli

Hello,

Welcome to debatecraft. Having an area of expertise in debates actually isn’t a bad idea. Unfortunately sometimes it is hard to predict who will accept a debate.

One thing I recommend doing is setting the minimum elo to accept the debate high and ask people to contact you or post in the comments if they want to accept. This way you can better vet opponents.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

"Kohai, your entrance to the thread was legendary, you had a solve and a winning PoE right when you showed up, super impressive stuff, even more so considering it wasn't even your objective!!" - Zrein

#5

@Sidewalker

That's not actually true, the part where you said that Hinduism can't be removed. First let's start frome here, yes, Hinduism is indeed a way to live life. A principle of set one must follow, to be called a Hindu. The Roots of Hinduism are actually unknown, till date. But what we see in Hinduism today, it is highly logical to assume that it has been a power system all along. How will one marry, how will one have kids, who will be the ruler, who will be the merchant and who will be the slave. What will be the role of a man, what will be the role of a woman. Hinduism is largely about these things, and obviously there are many many rituals. Marriage is a ritual, one holding a ceremony for his new built house is a ritual. The naming of a new born is a ritual. The Death of a person is a ritual. Hinduism, is indeed a way to live one's life. And when I say that we need to remove Hinduism, you can definitely interpret complete REMOVAL, both of the faith and the rituals(way to live) along. Maybe I failed to get to the core of the problem, maybe I assumed foreigners to know a lot about Hinduism. I will correct my mistake.

Marriage:- It involves dowry, which I have stated enough about in my arguments. 7 Circles(saat phere, the couple takes oath upon fire) The Oaths are problamatic, they give sexist duties to men and women. Both are vicrims, but the system is by default more partial with women.

Child Birth:- The Child's mother is Supposed to Drink Cow Urine. Maybe that's enough for an argument itself.

Death:- Suppose the father has a son and a daughter, the son will always give fire to the body. The Ritual will be done by the son only, even if Daughter gave her entire life to the father. And a following children requires the son's wife and children.

Enough talking about Hinduism being harsh to women, Castism is perhaps the hottest debate till date. And it's a direct concept from Hinduism.

When I said that It's not impossible to remove Hinduism, I meant that Hinduism is already set on the verge of death. Apatheism is killing it. In India both males and females are going to jobs, when they promise about roles in a marriage, they are doing it for the sake of elders who believe in this and socital acceptance. If not as much comparable to Christianity, Hinduism has preety much taken a diluted form. But poison is poison. Complete removal is the best option for poison, always.

Nobody follows Manusmriti, dowry is being boycotted, mother's are refusing to drink cow pee😅, and a lot more. So Hinduism is already set on the path to end up like west, in a few decades.

and one of my biggest mistake in this debate, I am realizing now. I was conveying the sense of 'killing Hinduism' when I should have said that "Hinduism is dying and that's a good thing" the most dangerous argument, which I have struggle tackling are 'You can reform Hinduism', I am always preety bad with explaining to people that, when you talk about reforming a religion, you are just killing the religion ans putting the blanket of reform on it. Yes it's a way to live life, and yes it has faith involved in it, and yes that's a bad thing, both the blind faith and out dated rituals. If something is a way to live one's life, it doesn't make it necessarily good. And yes, I thought writing the last paragraph in Italic would be cool

Edit post

Mentions Text*

That's not actually true, the part where you said that Hinduism can't be removed. First let's start frome here, yes, Hinduism is indeed a way to live life. A principle of set one must follow, to be called a Hindu. The Roots of Hinduism are actually unknown, till date. But what we see in Hinduism today, it is highly logical to assume that it has been a power system all along. How will one marry, how will one have kids, who will be the ruler, who will be the merchant and who will be the slave. What will be the role of a man, what will be the role of a woman. Hinduism is largely about these things, and obviously there are many many rituals. Marriage is a ritual, one holding a ceremony for his new built house is a ritual. The naming of a new born is a ritual. The Death of a person is a ritual. Hinduism, is indeed a way to live one's life. And when I say that we need to remove Hinduism, you can definitely interpret complete REMOVAL, both of the faith and the rituals(way to live) along. Maybe I failed to get to the core of the problem, maybe I assumed foreigners to know a lot about Hinduism. I will correct my mistake. Marriage:- It involves dowry, which I have stated enough about in my arguments. 7 Circles(saat phere, the couple takes oath upon fire) The Oaths are problamatic, they give sexist duties to men and women. Both are vicrims, but the system is by default more partial with women.Child Birth:- The Child's mother is Supposed to Drink Cow Urine. Maybe that's enough for an argument itself.Death:- Suppose the father has a son and a daughter, the son will always give fire to the body. The Ritual will be done by the son only, even if Daughter gave her entire life to the father. And a following children requires the son's wife and children.Enough talking about Hinduism being harsh to women, Castism is perhaps the hottest debate till date. And it's a direct concept from Hinduism. When I said that It's not impossible to remove Hinduism, I meant that Hinduism is already set on the verge of death. Apatheism is killing it. In India both males and females are going to jobs, when they promise about roles in a marriage, they are doing it for the sake of elders who believe in this and socital acceptance. If not as much comparable to Christianity, Hinduism has preety much taken a diluted form. But poison is poison. Complete removal is the best option for poison, always. Nobody follows Manusmriti, dowry is being boycotted, mother's are refusing to drink cow pee😅, and a lot more. So Hinduism is already set on the path to end up like west, in a few decades. and one of my biggest mistake in this debate, I am realizing now. I was conveying the sense of 'killing Hinduism' when I should have said that "Hinduism is dying and that's a good thing" the most dangerous argument, which I have struggle tackling are 'You can reform Hinduism', I am always preety bad with explaining to people that, when you talk about reforming a religion, you are just killing the religion ans putting the blanket of reform on it. Yes it's a way to live life, and yes it has faith involved in it, and yes that's a bad thing, both the blind faith and out dated rituals. If something is a way to live one's life, it doesn't make it necessarily good. And yes, I thought writing the last paragraph in Italic would be cool

Conversation

Edit comment

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post