[devonin]

Originally Posted by Vendetta21

It does not throw philosophical discussion out the window. Nothing is thrown out the window. You've misunderstood what I'm saying. For instance, discussing "romanticism" in terms of its truth value is arbitrary, but discussing "romanticism" in terms of other values is fine, such as the impact it would have on a follower of the ideas of "romanticism." If we are to allow people to discuss arbitrary things in terms of truth value, we perpetuate a two-tiered system for this forum in which there are the morons and the teachers. I don't feel like perpetuating this place as the "A concise introduction on why your statement cannot be supported, 101" forum.

Well, first of all I object to your use of 'morons' in this context. Simply being unfamiliar with how to properly carry out a discussion does not make one a moron. That said, is there something wrong with a subsection of the forum topics following along student/teacher lines? How do you think students stop being students? When they've been taught what they need to know.

If we lock out everyone who isn't up to your stringent standards, how will any of them ever become more reasoning, critical thinkers?

I didn't say where truth values can't be "readily determined." Nothing in what I said implies that. I said where truth values CANNOT be determined under any methodology. There is a very, very big difference. If you honestly don't understand the difference I will illuminate it for you.

Philosophy as a field has spent several thousand years discussing the potential ramifications of various theories whose truth values cannot be determined. I'm not sure where you feel justified in saying that such actions are bad or wrong, or that they shoudln't be allowed in this forum.

I think that you are unsure about the types of things that I wish to see less of, and that is an error in my communication. I am trying to get rid of the periodical "Does God Exist?" threads for one,

I, and quite a few others in this forum find such discussions interesting and enjoyable to take part in, even knowing full well that no conclusion is going to be reached in such a thread. Sometimes the process and the analysis of other viewpoints is worth doing in itself, even though no solid conclusion will result.

and a lot of the other threads that have the aroma of being brought up by a 14 year old or someone who is sophomoric in their belief set who come in with an agenda to make a claim, and then stick to that claim despite their lack of evidence, rhetoric, fluency, etc.

This forum has a lot of 14 year olds. A lot of threads will therefore be started by 14 year olds. It happens. Some of them will stick to their claim. This is not remotely a failing unique to 14 year olds. However, some of them do re-evaluate their beliefs in light of the reasonable evidence that this forum provides. Explain to me how that is not a boon to humanity in general? Many people have improved dramatically their ability to put forward a reasoned argument, and expanded their viewpoint substantially because they were -allowed- even -encouraged- to make their "sophomoric" thread.

It is one of the things that I think many of us feels plagues this forum,

Some sort of petition or other source to back up the claim that -many- people would like to see well over half of the kinds of threads made here be completely disallowed would be warranted here, I think.

and I'm just trying to develop a concise logical defense against this kind of thing. Critical thinking is not for rampant apologetics, and I think we all commonly agree of that.

Um...apologetics is an integral part of any and every philosophical or critical discourse. Apologetics is the process of addressing objections which have been stated or are likely to be stated in opposition to your point. If nobody practiced apologetics, we'd see a thread go:
I make statement A
I object, on grounds B
Um...I make statement A!

Apologetics is the art of dealing with objection B within the context of statement A, and without the ability to respond to people's objections, CT would stop being about discussion or debate and start being a collection of un-responded to essays.

I know what I am saying is probably a basic statement taken to technical levels, but I'm saying it for the purpose of discussion. This is a thread on logical fallacies, and thus I used the logical fallacy that is akin to this kind of apologetics in general, the Petitio Principii fallacy, to try and show the lack of argumentative value in someone who posts with that sort of aroma.

So here it looks like you're trying to forward the claim that "Everybody who practices apologetics begs the question to do so" Which is clearly hogwash. You've practiced apologetics in this very thread, as soon as you said that you were forming "a defense" against "this kind of thing." You were anticipating an objection to your stated point, and then addressed it in advance. That's one of the most common ways to practice apologetics.

You'll forgive my saying so, but this entire post sequence comes across as quite superior and elitist. To claim that some large number of the threads in this forum ought not to be allowed simply because they occasionally -start- speaking to some larger context than you feel they ought to?!

(Further, calling people morons, your line about 'those who do not have the capacity to grasp what I'm explaining', and your dramatic overuse of "hundred-dollar words" doesn't lend you the credibility you seem to think it does. Instead of seperating yourself from the "14 year old aroma" you disdain so much, you instead paint yourself with a "14 year old with a thesaurus" aroma that is pretty unappealing itself.)

A thread entitled "Does God Exist?" implies a question that has no concrete answer. Yes, we know. Presumably the person who made the thread also knows that. If there -were- proof, the answer would already be known.

But please, explain to me how discussion along the lines of "If God -did- exist, what would the ramifications be" and "If God -didn't- exist, what would the ramifications be?" is somehow not worthy of you or this forum.