TheAnalyticalAdvocate

Umm it would be interesting to see what ai platforms say what because they are all different to some degree lol

Maybe lol

You do still seem pretty active. Granted I’m not on much so what is active to me may be different lol

I’ve always been curious of that format, but have been nervous to try it lol! Some of the topics chosen I have no clue about. Then the double wammy is you may have to debate on a position you don’t agree with. Granted that could be the fun in it lol!

Sorry for the late reply! Part of why I am contemplating whether I am retiring from debating or just taking a break has to do with me working full time, being a PhD student, teaching in college part time, and publishing research. I am currently leading a research team and I saw this message and honestly forgot to reply. I honestly can’t say I know what was better, just more that I like the written debate sphere and don’t want it to die out. If I come back great if not I still want to be a spectator lol! I can’t say much on quality because when I debated on debate art, I did have a lot of wins from people not replying while on this site most of the people seem to reply. On debate art I never debated the same person twice while here it is like I have more long standing rivalries (If you can call it that. I’ve only been on here about a year lol). But I will say my closet debate was on debate art. It was voted to a draw and people were arguing who won in the comments. What was funny about that debate, is it changed how I approached debate entirely and also inspired me to write a law article that I spoke on at a research conference. It may be getting published, but I have a lot going on where it isn’t my highest priority. If we talk about where I feel the tightest fit of community I like here the best. The people here are extremely friendly yet competitive. I just saw less and less people which had me thinking lol! But maybe it is a touch of sadness knowing I may or may not be returning to debate, because I want the sphere open lol! I think after my last debate I will take some time before I make my decision. It’s more do I need to put time and effort into other things that build my resume up so I end up at a high end job, or can I do that plus debate lol!

So I went by a different name on debateart, so some may not recognize me. I hope nobody gets offended when I ask this, and I hope the individuals in charge don’t get upset. But I guess my question is does it seem like the written debate sphere is becoming smaller (other worse dying out)? When I debated on debate art it often seemed like more debates were going on with more people while here there seems to be a niche crew that remains active. I don’t mean any of that negatively. Just that it is a tad interesting and I hope that the space can grow more. I say this mainly due to being a tad sad. Not because I am upset, but more because I may retire from debating or I may take an extended break. This doesn’t have anything to do with the site, but I am a parent, a PhD student working on my dissertation, I am presenting at a research conference this fall, I am leading a few research teams, I am working on individual research studies, I am teaching full time in k-12 education, and I am teaching part time at a college at night. Whether I walk away and stop debating or whether I start back I plan to come back to this site. If not to debate to listen to other people and ask questions. I honestly want this site to thrive because I enjoy the epistemic push between others. So without me getting weird and sentimental, does the written debate sphere seem to be shrinking?

Honestly it depends. Some people could just not have confidence which impacts things lol! When I was younger I had confidence issues but the moment I fixed that I was dating a lot. Fast forward to now I’ve been married for a few years. Really there is someone for everyone. Just don’t worry too much upgrade yourself and treat dating as looking to interact with good quality individuals. Know the qualities you want for marriage and if you match well with that person and they like you it may help. Granted I can’t act like this is an end all be all lol!

I had to look up the concept you were talking about lol! Do you think the trielma means that knowledge is impossible, or only that our justifications are never ultimately certain? As a researcher in behavior science I honestly would rarely say that I know something to for sure be considered true because it is hard to prove something for certain and one can make the case that hardly anything fits this criteria. Thanks for your reply.

I want to thank you for your reply. It was well thought out and I feel I have to respond because I come from a very different background but can see some similarities and some differences. One of the things you mentioned was how it seems God can ground truth? What makes you say that? I myself honestly would love to believe in God, but how do we know he is real and how does this affect truth? Like from my lens empiricists often define truth as “the exact conformity between a mental judgment and external reality, established strictly through sensory observation, testing, and scientific experiment” (Webster). I use to be a real strong Christian but over time as I went through being a PhD student in research and statistics, observing this through this lens is difficult when seeing people in society with phenomenon we can measure (I really still say I’m Christian due to Pascal’s wager, but the complexity of showing if this is true creates an interesting question). I also ask this because there were a lot of philosophers who were atheist or more agnostic in faith.

Laws

So I actually have a lot of agreement here. A lot of what you show can be seen empirically such as laws may deter stuff, but we can see how home life can affect how a decent amount of people become later in life. Research shows that a lot of individuals in prison had rough home life’s, repeat negative cycles from family members, and developed a low IQ through having a negative home life. Also a side note you mentioned that truth is expressed through wisdom and many other things. Physiologist and phenomenological researchers such as sternburg often note wisdom depends on culture and environment. So what do you mean by this in your NDE section. Ultimately thank you for this reply. I honestly want to read a lot more on this so if you have some books to suggests I would be happy to read lol! A lot of this I am clueless about so I can only comment on things I have some basis to comment on lol!

Is this like a pragmatic approach? And what may happen if people disagree? What happens in society can be complex and we as humans have been shown to be wrong at times. At one point we thought the earth was the middle of the universe. I do like the last part though where you said that there could be different truths. And I’m not trying to be a stickler lol! The way I think and the way I have been trained to think as a researcher is just complex it is hard to narrow a lot of stuff down lol!

So I honestly would have to read a tad more, but it is interesting you say you don’t believe in truth? I’m not sure I agree if you mean for certain. I could see things where seeing something in society as true is hard to come by. An empirical example when we try to understand issues in society is that causation is hard to come by (Campbell & Stanley 1963). There are steps to help with this though. I guess my other question is there are different philosophical approaches. How do you identify which is the right one? Or do you use a mixture of different groups?

I wanted to message to get different individuals thoughts on their methodology on how they determine something is true in society? I use to debate a tad on debateart before I started debating on here a few months ago, and from what I notice a lot of people use different frameworks to determine things. I’ve debated a few people who use more philosophical approaches, while some use more simplistic approaches. I typically go more through an empirical lens because I like to see the results in front of me. I am starting to get interested in philosophy, but haven’t got into as much as I would like due to me being a peer review researcher who has limited time (I also am a newer parent so lol)! I’m interested in other perspectives so maybe I can get some fresh debate opponents for when I come back to debate after I take a break (Once I close out of my last debate here I will probably take some time to breathe. I am working on multiple publications, while working full time, while being a PhD student, and while I am also teaching college part time. I also have the kid thing lol). I also am just interested in different perspectives lol! Also if someone is interested in debating me you can DM me. I lean left on most issues, while I lean right on some.

It use to be that way lol! It’s really been in the past three years you are so beaten up you like need that time to recover. Granted that could just be my district. Over managing bosses, that pick fights with you daily even when you follow their directive. The kids are getting worse. It’s actually isn’t them being mean but more impulsive. The act way before thinking. More paper work from before. Angry parents. Honestly most teachers at the school I am at feel this way. They hate the bosses, the kids are crazy, and the parents are crazy lol! Teaching has become the least important part of the job now, which is where my main disconnect has been lol! I have a love hate relationship with it lol!

Ehh most of what I am doing will probably be your second category. I will basically be doing research, doing data analytics, or teaching in college. Pay can be good and is less stressful than the k-12 environment. I’m more just trying to see how everyone improves their credentials. I want to leave my job sooner rather than later. I’m racking up small wins, but I am unsure when I will be ready for the transition because even entry level is becoming competitive. For example academia is extremely competitive. It’s best to have some edge somewhere. Granted I may have to start doing a job that looks at data, research, or some form of program evaluation. I may need to hault trying to look at colleges for a job. Teaching full time and part are very different, where the colleges often expect a lot more to be hired full time.

So out of curiosity I want to ask the debate craft community how I should know if I am doing the right things to transition to a better paying career field. I guess I am asking for advice to see if I need to be doing something else to improve my resume and skills so I can get a job after I make it through grad school. I am currently a teacher, and I am trying to transition out to make more money. Well and the stress while at work isn’t worth it (I guess the bonus is I get time off, but how things are going, I would rather work all year compared to being in a classroom). I am 75% done with my PhD program in Educational Research and statistics, but I feel that I should be a tad further than where I am. I got my first peer review paper published this April, and I am about to start teaching College part time at a University at night. I have a lot of wins, such as presenting at three research conferences with two additional manuscripts going through the peer review process. I should be grateful because that is a lot of wins, but I haven’t caught a big win just yet career wise. Granted outside of teaching in college most of the jobs I could get in my new field of study are outside of my town. I guess this long post is, how do you know you are moving in the right direction?

lol I got an inexpensive charcoal but it won’t be a waste for me. I like to cook and I host a decent amount of family cookouts. I also live in Alabama in the U.S., so food is everything. I would be fat if I didn’t exercise religiously lol!

SatanLucy wrote:

The problem with hate speech is it's never just "speech", since it's reflective of your beliefs and actions. If you say something like "homosexuality/being transgender is a mental disorder", congratz that's what you believe. You just admitted to treating people differently. It is speech that's reflective of how you interact with others, which is action.

All speech can lead to action, but doesn't mean it will, so this is irrelevant.

I can say that trans people have a mental disorder while I still treat trans people just fine. Tho personally, I don't think mental disorders even exist. People literally just made it up.

I will do my best to critique this. If I misrepresent you, feel free to correct this. I think the issue with this is you are arguing possibility vs probability. You can tell the difference by using statistical analysis, quantitative research, and even qualitative research at times. So to use an example if you said that individuals in that community have a mental disorder, and their were negative affects such as suicide rates, hate crimes, or unfair work treatment then you could probably make a case this would be a form of hate speech. Now in the U.S. this isn’t prohibited from saying but companies and online platforms have a right to block certain things to prevent harm. I look at it similar to YouTube terms of service. If you don’t want to follow certain guideline then you don’t have to use the platform. Now if we are talking about saying something in your own place, out somewhere, at a protest, or just out anywhere it’s your constitutional right. Now where I may agree with you is that I don’t think there should be limits on this. For example I don’t think sites should restrict thoughts because it furthers the divide. Scholars such as Ambrose mention that it takes a while to change long standing ideas someone was raised in. So even though hateful speech sucks, it should be allowed so discussions could happen. Silencing it, just amplifies the other side. Then we get nowhere, because both sides are going to fight to control certain platforms.

Yea! Honestly I thought about getting a griddle as well. I’ve also seen people use wood pellets. I don’t have any idea how that works. I am pretty good with my with my new charcoal grill. Well for a newbie lol! My family wasn’t that good at cooking so I was scared to get gas. Granted they weren’t too good at cooking on the house either lol! Granted I was thankful to be fed everyday. Some people aren’t that lucky.

I may buy both eventually. I ended up getting a charcoal because I read somewhere that the flavor was better. Granted I wouldn’t know. I had a family member who use to grill and it tasted chemically lol

Honestly I feel free speech should be allowed on each platform, but I could see why certain rules are in place. For example the constitution in the U.S. allows this, but if someone owns a cite they get to make up the rules on whether they want it or not. And I wouldn’t think this is a violation of constitutional rights, but I do feel this opens the floor to something dangerous. A good example of this is how censorship how divided both sides of the political isle are currently in the U.S. Their are of course several reasons outside of this as well, but behavior scientist often note that people individuals grew up with, learned from, and surrounded themselves with are often where the majority of one’s views lay. To change long standing views discussions and gently bridging the gap is how minds typically change.

So out of curiosity and I have no clue if I will get many answers, but does anyone like to grill anything in particular. I bought a charcoal grill and I love it, but I am having a lot of people tell me that I would regret not getting a gas grill. I thought charcoal gives better flavor. Are they saying this out of convince? lol I have no clue if anyone grills on here so this might be a dead in the water post lol!

I will do my best to try and answer this, from a few different lenses. Even though I am a peer review scholar, my opinion and viewpoints at times can be flawed, so take it how you will (I a tad new as well, so in the realm of this field I am like a baby lol). When reading your post talking about skin color you mention discriminate it as one of the many things on wondering why we see race. I assume that means you think racism or some form of discrimination exists. I am unsure to what degree you think so, but I will run with this. Society will always have people who discriminate against race or other factors, which I will never understand why. This leaves one factor you mentioned as something I can’t answer easily. Regardless this answer actually answers the other factors mentioned if you look through a societal lens, research lens, or even policy lens. Scholars such as WEB Dubois named the term walking between the color line and scholars such as Jarvis Givens coined the term removing a veil. This simply means that minorities or individuals who are discriminated often see racism or discrimination easier than people who don’t face discrimination. Individuals like this want you to see race because without seeing race, you often miss discrimination that happens to other groups in front of you. This actually moves into the next points of adding numbers, statistics, and classifying demographics is how researchers can keep up with what happens to this population in different areas. Take education, mental health, hate crimes, police brutality, prison rates, hiring rates and segregation levels. Through each of these and honestly a whole lot more we can see that regardless where you stand on these issues, certain groups are to be more affected than others. This is typically specific minority groups. Policy makers can make decisions on this to hopefully reduce issues in certain groups and researchers can flag racial issues through research. Their is way more that goes into it than this, but given my first peer review paper that was published a few months ago dealt with racial issues, I wanted to do my best to answer this topic.

Dang that sounds interesting. I’m going to have to read one before I participate lol! It’s an interesting concept for sure.

To be fair as well I haven’t done every debate type lol! I do actually think that is a fair point with the logic bit. Some people can win based on flow. Well I’ve at least seen in live debates. How does ultrated work? Is that like set voters voting on something? That does seem like a good idea as well. I’ve only debated like 5 times on dart and I’ve only had 3 here. So my evaluation isn’t perfect. I guess I want to try each voting system out in my debates.

Hey everyone. I am a PhD student at the University of Southern Mississippi in Educational Research. I also teach adjunct at night at the University of South Alabama (Well currently lol). I publish research articles in peer review journal and I present at research conferences (I just got news my first peer review article is going to be published, so I am a newer scholar). I hope to have some fun debates and I welcome discussion!

I haven’t used both sites much as I only had a handful of debates on debate art. One thing I do miss about the old site was the multiple criterion voting. I felt like it was a way voters could think throughly through votes while the voting here is more just who you thought won. I like this site a lot though. Granted I have only had three debates here so I may be missing something lol!