Dodging the question: a comment

Feedback and site usage questions

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Diagoras
Guru
Posts: 1392
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
Has thanked: 170 times
Been thanked: 579 times

Dodging the question: a comment

Post #1

Post by Diagoras »

In the thread, “How Crazy does Evolution Seem?”:
Post #1047 by Sherlock Holmes » Thu Mar 10, 2022 9:41 am
viewtopic.php?p=1070274#p1070274
Let's play a parlor game shall we? are these two related?
Compare:
In the thread, “Evolution v Creationism: A Dead Issue”:
Post #264 by Sherlock Holmes » Thu Mar 10, 2022 10:16 am
viewtopic.php?p=1070281#p1070281
Let's play a parlor game shall we? are these two related?
For any general observer of these debates, it might have become confusing as to which particular thread contained the issue of contrasting wolves and thylacines! I’m not sure why Sherlock Holmes didn’t simply link to the first post when he wanted to raise the issue in the second thread.

I note that both threads have garnered fairly detailed responses on the matter, despite being somewhat tangential to the debates going on at the time. I know I took a reasonable amount of time to consider my reply, and I’m sure others did too. I’m somewhat puzzled by the fact that, at 6:13 pm on Thu Mar 10, 2022, Sherlock Holmes said:
Now that Facebook are openly allowing posts that call for violence against Russians, a level of depravity I hoped I'd never see, I'm taking some time away from all this.
- and yet the “Evolution v Creationism: A Dead Issue” thread saw him posting again by 11:09 am on Sat Mar 12, 2022, and subsequently staying involved in the “A 6 Day Creation” thread and the “Bounded mutation” thread. Not to mention at least a couple of threads in the Christianity and Apologetics forum.

The reason I bring this up is that before the whole ‘parlor game’ challenge was thrown into the mix, Sherlock Holmes back in post#248 here:
viewtopic.php?p=1070151#p1070151

said:
Well adaptive change is one thing, bacteria becoming mice is quite another.
This claim was challenged by me, and evidence to the contrary was provided. No acknowledgement of that challenge was forthcoming, and I note that several other members here have voiced frustration with a similar pattern of behaviour from Sherlock Holmes: a consistent tactic of ‘dodging the issue’ when faced with some debate opponents.

As it happens, thylacines are mentioned in Dawkins’ excellent book, “The Greatest Show on Earth” on pages 300 to 301, when the author notes the prominent holes in the roof of the mouth of a thylacine skull – consistent with marsupials. There follows a number of comparisons between placental and marsupial mammals which show convergent evolution quite clearly. However, I’m not particularly sure that a debate about how we can test convergent evolution as a theory (both at the physical appearance level and the molecular DNA level) is what was really desired – despite duplicating the ‘parlor game’ challenge across two posts.

I’d like to think that all members here would respect the time and effort that their opponents put into their posts – and would acknowledge such, even if they don’t plan to engage further.

Online
benchwarmer
Guru
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 1929 times
Been thanked: 722 times

Re: Dodging the question: a comment

Post #2

Post by benchwarmer »

[Replying to Diagoras in post #1]

People who engage in this type of 'debate' behavior are quickly spotted and I imagine roundly ignored by most readers.

I can tell you that posters who engage in this type of behavior become 'skip' for me regardless of what they post after a certain point. I instead scroll past and read responses from debaters who actually take the time to engage the questions - even if I don't agree with their conclusions.

I agree it can be frustrating when trying to have a serious exchange, but I think people who do as described are only hurting their own reputation and any case they may be trying to make. They are often just digging their own hole deeper and many probably don't even bother listening at the hole after a certain point.

User avatar
amortalman
Site Supporter
Posts: 577
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 9:35 am
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Dodging the question: a comment

Post #3

Post by amortalman »

[Replying to benchwarmer in post #2]

I just ran into this problem with a poster (I won't call him a "debater"). He would pick out one line in my lengthy response and reply to that one line with a quip. As far as I'm concerned he can debate himself from now on.

Online
User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 13968
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 904 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Dodging the question: a comment

Post #4

Post by William »

amortalman wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:48 pm [Replying to benchwarmer in post #2]

I just ran into this problem with a poster (I won't call him a "debater"). He would pick out one line in my lengthy response and reply to that one line with a quip. As far as I'm concerned he can debate himself from now on.
It is important to the discussion process to acknowledge the content of another's post, rather than to give one-line replies skipping over pertinent aspects.
I don't know whether it is thinly veiled contempt/disrespect or simply the product of an inability to communicate adequately, or some other reason, but it doesn't lend itself to decent conversation.

Single line responses are a poor substitute for well thought out responses...

Online
User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 13968
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 904 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Dodging the question: a comment

Post #5

Post by William »

William wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 6:51 pm
amortalman wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:48 pm [Replying to benchwarmer in post #2]

I just ran into this problem with a poster (I won't call him a "debater"). He would pick out one line in my lengthy response and reply to that one line with a quip. As far as I'm concerned he can debate himself from now on.
It is important to the discussion process to acknowledge the content of another's post, rather than to give one-line replies skipping over pertinent aspects.
I don't know whether it is thinly veiled contempt/disrespect or simply the product of an inability to communicate adequately, or some other reason, but it doesn't lend itself to decent conversation.

Single line responses are a poor substitute for well thought out responses...
This link goes to an example of the above:

viewtopic.php?p=1083885#p1083885

My reply is the post directly after it.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2137 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Dodging the question: a comment

Post #6

Post by Tcg »

[Replying to Diagoras in post #1]

It should also be noted that the length of post doesn't determine its value. Some posters add multiple paragraphs of claims and yet provide zero support for their claims. One need not respond with reciprocal paragraphs to point out the fact that claims absent evidence are useless in a debate context.

Some posters think that their imaginations are evidence of something. Their imaginations are evidence only of their imaginations. It doesn't take much more than a sentence or two to point out that fact that some make claims absent evidence.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Online
User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 13968
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 904 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Dodging the question: a comment

Post #7

Post by William »

Also to note, some folk make unsupported claims complaining about other folk having made unsupported claims.

It is a healthy practice that if one is going to claim anything, one should always support said claim.

If someone accuses another of making claims, but does not support their claim [of accusation] by quoting the one they are accusing - to show that the accused has indeed made a claim, then this in itself is an unsupported claim.

[Sometimes I think folk who do this are conflating 'claim' with 'statement of opinion'.]

Opinions [logic-based or not] are allowed in debate. Hand waving them away as "Unsupported Claims" is underhanded and hypocritical and probably, if not already, should be against the rules.

Post Reply