Can we debate respectfully?

[Sherlock Holmes]

I've listened to this debate several times over the years, it was broadcast by the BBC on radio a great many years ago.

Its a debate on the existence of God between two very respected intellectuals, Bertrand Russel and Frederick Copleston. Each of these men wrote a comprehensive history of philosophy and were well versed in philosophy, logic, history and so on, they were well matched.

What is striking is that neither party ever gets personal, they focus entirely on their opponents arguments, no petty insinuating, snide remarks or disparaging words.

Fr. Frederick C. Copleston vs Bertrand Russell

If you prefer to skip the introductions and go right to the debate use this link.

Fr. Frederick C. Copleston vs Bertrand Russell - No Intro

So the question - why do so many debates in the Science and Religion area often end up getting personal and stray away from the pure hard logic of the topic itself?

[Tcg]

Yeah and while you are busy tallying up strikes and technical fouls of certain posters, check the Christian/Atheist ratio on the moderation board.

Yes, and that ratio can be checked here: memberlist.php?mode=team

The ratio is exactly 50/50. Are you suggesting that is unfair?


Tcg

[We_Are_VENOM]

Yes, and that ratio can be checked here: memberlist.php?mode=team

The ratio is exactly 50/50. Are you suggesting that is unfair?


Tcg

Ok, then I stand corrected.

That still doesn't explain why I got dinged for accusing someone of splitting hairs.

I am no angel, but that one is absolutely ridiculous.

The next time someone accuses me of, lets say, using god of the gaps reasoning, I will report it and see if they get dinged..and if they don't, then something else is going on here.

[Tcg]

That still doesn't explain why I got dinged for accusing someone of splitting hairs.

There is no mystery or conspiracy involved. otseng explained clearly why you received a Moderator Warning.

viewtopic.php?p=1087589#p1087589


Tcg

[Inquirer]

[Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #1]

I blame the New Atheist movement for it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism

Some of them came across as smug, patronizing, and antagonistic.

Let's see. The poster asking the OP question, Sherlock Holmes, racked up 9 Moderator Warnings before changing their ID to Inquirer. Under that ID they've received 5 Moderator Comments.

The poster known as We Are VENOM has received a total of 2 Moderator Warnings, one a final Warning, and 20 Moderator Comments.

Neither, as far as I know, identify as New Atheists. I suspect the problem lies elsewhere.


Tcg

The number of warnings is a function of (among other things) the number of complainants. In some thread where there are 2 theists and 10 atheists for example a report of a potentially problem post has a higher probability for theists than atheists. The bulk (if not all) of complaints against me were for posts in the Science and Religion sub-forum, this seems to have very few theists (I wonder why...).

Finally I reported numerous violations myself which never resulted in the poster being reprimanded, that lack of impartiality is real and demonstrable, anyone can look at the many examples I gave of violators who were never reprimanded, that sets a poor example and implies its OK to insult if the target is a theist.

Its very easy to show there's bias here, deliberate or not.

[Inquirer]

That still doesn't explain why I got dinged for accusing someone of splitting hairs.

There is no mystery or conspiracy involved. otseng explained clearly why you received a Moderator Warning.

viewtopic.php?p=1087589#p1087589


Tcg

One more thing, every warning I received was warranted, I have never complained about being warned, this is not the issue Tcg. The issue is why are some reported violators not warned...there are many examples I can provide, you need only ask.

Here's just one example, reported yet nothing was said or done, if you look closely at the thread you'll see two theist reprimands and only a theist was reprimanded - I mean really? you think this is defensible?

Here are the two reprimands directed at Eloi, while all the time others (non-theists) are merrily abusing and insulting and not a word was said!

viewtopic.php?p=1080058#p1080058
Reprimanded for:

Let me see if I catch the interest of any of the defenders of evolutionism on the forum (apart from the stalker).

viewtopic.php?p=1080145#p1080145
Reprimanded for:

I don't want anyone harassing/stalking me all around.
I can be as sarcastic as I want, just like any anti-religious forumer here.
Drink your own tea.
Good bye.

Yet this: viewtopic.php?p=1080058#p1080058
Where this was said:

Can you please post like an actual adult (assuming you are one)?

Resulted in no reprimand...

This is all real data, facts, evidence that the moderation process is far from impartial...why not discuss with fellow moderators? why not take steps to fix this?

[Bust Nak]

Here's just one example, reported yet nothing was said or done...

There is no record of a closed report, so unless one of us has deleted it... Either way, thanks for bringing the post to my attention.

[otseng]

[Replying to We_Are_VENOM in post #49]

All I'm going to say is please read Policy on responding to moderator actions.

[Clownboat]

(Bolded is my addition).
I make a lot of atheists uncomfortable on here (I don't see why this would be true. Seems you are just imagining this.), and on a forum filled with the opposing party also acting as the authorities (the moderator ratio is fair), it is only a matter of time before I get MLK'ed, or Jesus Christ'ed.

Thats what happens when you ruffle the wrong feathers.

You get JFK'ed.

You don't say.

Persectution complex is a real thing.
I hope I don't get JFK'ed for pointing that out!

per·se·cu·tion com·plex
noun
an irrational and obsessive feeling or fear that one is the object of collective hostility or ill-treatment on the part of others.

[We_Are_VENOM]

(Bolded is my addition).
I make a lot of atheists uncomfortable on here (I don't see why this would be true. Seems you are just imagining this.), and on a forum filled with the opposing party also acting as the authorities (the moderator ratio is fair), it is only a matter of time before I get MLK'ed, or Jesus Christ'ed.

Thats what happens when you ruffle the wrong feathers.

You get JFK'ed.

You don't say.

Persectution complex is a real thing.
I hope I don't get JFK'ed for pointing that out!

per·se·cu·tion com·plex
noun
an irrational and obsessive feeling or fear that one is the object of collective hostility or ill-treatment on the part of others.

JFK: Man, I get this strange feeling that because of my positive attitude towards African Americans in this country, along with my objection to intervening in Vietnam...that a lot of the establishment dont like me...including some of the American people.

JFK's circle: Aw man, you are just trippin. Don't talk such foolishness. Everyone loves you.

JFK: I guess you're right. Thank you for the reassurance.

See, we have what was said above^...

And then we have..

November 22 1963

[otseng]

Nobody here gets banned from the forum for their position, whether it be a left or right political position, godly or godless religious position, conservative or liberal position, woke or non-woke position, etc. The only thing that people are judged by are the rules. And in particular, civility and respect. If they demonstrate incivility and disrespect, they will be censured, regardless of their position.

On the charge of bias, this forum is not perfect, but I think we've done a pretty good job for 18 years running. Anyone is free to go elsewhere and see if there's any place that does a better job at maintaining fairness in religious debates.

Anyone who has a perfect record of civility and yet get censured are the only ones who have a justification of claiming to be unfairly treated. Or anyone who consistently violates the rules and are never given any warnings. Any takers?