Fair to Challenge Claims?

[JoeyKnothead]

In another thread there is much complaining about atheists challenging theist claims. I find it a bit weird, what with this being a debate site and all, but there we go.

For debate:

Is it fair for atheists to challenge theist claims on this, a debate site?

Is it fair for atheists to challenge theist claims outside of debate?

What are the real and possible ramifications of challenging theist claims?

What are the real and possible ramifications of allowing theist claims to go unchallenged?

[naz]

In another thread there is much complaining about atheists challenging theist claims. I find it a bit weird, what with this being a debate site and all, but there we go.

For debate:

Is it fair for atheists to challenge theist claims on this, a debate site?

Is it fair for atheists to challenge theist claims outside of debate?

What are the real and possible ramifications of challenging theist claims?

What are the real and possible ramifications of allowing theist claims to go unchallenged?

If you question or challenge things just to judge people then place your judgments on the table along with your challenges. So debaters can depict your view points. I would like to have a good debate with a atheist but it is hard when they only want to put 1 foot in the arena.

[Crazy Ivan]

I'm not sure about "fair", but it seems to me to be very poor debating to challenge a claim without providing an alternative claim. This is not to say that all atheists do this, but it is common enough that it is worth mentioning.

I see you keep expecting atheists to provide "alternatives" to problems created by theists in the first place. This forum's primary goal is to debate theistic claims. These claims address questions or problems that the atheist is not required to acknowledge as independent from theological thought, thus "alternative" answers to the problems they create should not be expected, and certainly not regarded as "poor debating". Consider that if an atheist provides "alternatives" to theistic claims, he/she is no longer arguing from an atheist perspective, but from a theist one, which in my opinion makes your request rather nonsensical.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 7:

if you question or challenge things just to judge people then place your judgments on the table along with your challenges.

I put my challenges on your "table of judgemet" and you keep shoving them under the napkins.

How might I judge folks' claims if I can't tell those claims are truth?

So debaters can depict your view points.

How the heck can we ever debate when you keep complaining about the unfairness of it all?

My "viewpoint" is that some theists like to carry on about how their beliefs oughta be accepted on "faith", but they absolutely refuse to support their own claims.

I would like to have a good debate with a atheist but it is hard when they only want to put 1 foot in the arena

I would think a "good" debate would start of right there with folks supporting their claims. I'm funny that way.

[naz]

From Post 7:

if you question or challenge things just to judge people then place your judgments on the table along with your challenges.

I put my challenges on your "table of judgemet" and you keep shoving them under the napkins.

How might I judge folks' claims if I can't tell those claims are truth?

So debaters can depict your view points.

How the heck can we ever debate when you keep complaining about the unfairness of it all?

My "viewpoint" is that some theists like to carry on about how their beliefs oughta be accepted on "faith", but they absolutely refuse to support their own claims.

Trust me, I don't cry foul, or complain or cry or throw a tantrum... so don't take it the wrong way please.
Theist are not suppose to force their beliefs onto anyone, atleast those who are christian are not suppose to. However when you ask a "question" in the form a challenge, and get a response, don't look at it as someone trying to force their beliefs on you because you asked for a explanation and expect to debate.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 10:

Trust me, I don't cry foul, or complain or cry or throw a tantrum... so don't take it the wrong way please.

To heck you don't...

Couldnt agree more. Prove this, prove that. Then when you ask an atheist to explain their reason and logic behind things they have no reason or logic. Kind of sad when someone likes to build up an artificially superior complex just to antagonize other peoples views, beliefs and reasoning, pretty pathetic when you think about it.

I antagonize your views by challenging your views.

Theist are not suppose to force their beliefs onto anyone, atleast those who are christian are not suppose to.

"No true Christian" my foot. History is rife with examples of Christians trying to inflict their unfounded beliefs onto others.

Do you challenge my claim?

Please do.

However when you ask a "question" in the form a challenge, and get a response, don't look at it as someone trying to force their beliefs on you because you asked for a explanation and expect to debate.

Kinda hard to expect folks to show they speak truth when they refuse to do it.

[naz]

From Post 10:

Trust me, I don't cry foul, or complain or cry or throw a tantrum... so don't take it the wrong way please.

To heck you don't...

Couldnt agree more. Prove this, prove that. Then when you ask an atheist to explain their reason and logic behind things they have no reason or logic. Kind of sad when someone likes to build up an artificially superior complex just to antagonize other peoples views, beliefs and reasoning, pretty pathetic when you think about it.

I antagonize your views by challenging your views.

I was simply agreeing with someone else. Is that a crime?

Theist are not suppose to force their beliefs onto anyone, atleast those who are christian are not suppose to.

"No true Christian" my foot. History is rife with examples of Christians trying to inflict their unfounded beliefs onto others.

Do you challenge my claim?

Please do.

Aye, that is history, it is what it is, even though that isnt the way it is suppose to be.

However when you ask a "question" in the form a challenge, and get a response, don't look at it as someone trying to force their beliefs on you because you asked for a explanation and expect to debate.

Kinda hard to expect folks to show they speak truth when they refuse to do it.

you know that is just a matter of personal opinion.

[The Mad Haranguer]

In another thread there is much complaining about atheists challenging theist claims. I find it a bit weird, what with this being a debate site and all, but there we go.

For debate:

Is it fair for atheists to challenge theist claims on this, a debate site?

Is it fair for atheists to challenge theist claims outside of debate?

What are the real and possible ramifications of challenging theist claims?

What are the real and possible ramifications of allowing theist claims to go unchallenged?

There seems to be a great deal of confusion, especially among atheists, about what constitutes philosophy. Philosophy is the love of wisdom, not the possession of it and most certainly not love for the analysis of concepts. Its watchword is Know thyself, not Challenge what others believe. It is about ideas that move man toward total integration with the cosmos through self-interrogation, not proving or disproving concepts designed solely to solve problems of the intellect. If that's all it is, one might as well go off in a corner somewhere and masturbate. (Please excuse crude analogy.)

Unless it contributes something towards philosophy thus understood, what atheists call "debate" is nothing more than diatribe.

[Flail]

What are the real and possible ramifications of allowing theist claims to go unchallenged?

The Mad Haranguer responded:

There seems to be a great deal of confusion, especially among atheists, about what constitutes philosophy.

Which particular atheists are you referencing? What evidence do you have that there is confusion among these atheists about what 'constitutes'(?) philosophy? What has this,if anything, to do with the OP?

[Flail]

The Mad Haranguer wrote:

Philosophy is the 'love of wisdom', not the possession of it and most certainly [u']not[/u] love for the analysis of concepts'. Its watchword is Know thyself, not Challenge what others believe. It is about ideas that move man toward total integration with the cosmos through 'self-interrogation', not proving or disproving concepts designed solely to solve problems of the intellect. If that's all it is, one might as well go off in a corner somewhere and masturbate.

(emphasis added)
If your need is to "know thyself" by avoiding the analysis of concepts and if you seek the 'cosmos' through "self-interrogation", debate may not be your cup of tea...and you might want to go off in a corner somewhere and "love your wisdom".

[Crazy Ivan]

There seems to be a great deal of confusion, especially among atheists, about what constitutes philosophy.

Not only do I know what constitutes philosophy, I am also aware of a subforum here entitled "Philosophy", where one is more than entitled to "contribute something", as you put it. The "great deal of confusion" is obviously on your end, given you apparently don't know the forum's primary goal is to debate theistic claims, claims that can only be "contributed" to by being theistic. All this protestation, and referring to debate with anyone other than another theist who "contributes", as "diatribe", is clear indication of simple inability to support one's claims when debating with a nonbeliever.