Tal's epistemology (and DCP's)

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_marg

Post by _marg »

mo-watcher wrote: [Sorry Tal, but I find this ironic in light of your appearance on the FAIRboards some time back (perhaps a couple of years ago), when you would post your thoughts & completely ignore all serious counter-arguments.




The "FAIRboard" in the past when I read it, was not a debate board. It was an apologetic discussion board for the purpose of supporting and promoting Mormonism. I say "was" because I no longer look at it.

To my knowledge it didn't say it was a debate board and the owner/owners made clear it was not a "fair" board.

Participants were not free to argue their position unless it served the goals of the board.

It was pointless, a waste of time and energy for anyone to argue any position counter to the board's goals.
_Yoda

Post by _Yoda »

marg wrote:
mo-watcher wrote: [Sorry Tal, but I find this ironic in light of your appearance on the FAIRboards some time back (perhaps a couple of years ago), when you would post your thoughts & completely ignore all serious counter-arguments.




The "FAIRboard" in the past when I read it, was not a debate board. It was an apologetic discussion board for the purpose of supporting and promoting Mormonism. I say "was" because I no longer look at it.

To my knowledge it didn't say it was a debate board and the owner/owners made clear it was not a "fair" board.

Participants were not free to argue their position unless it served the goals of the board.

It was pointless, a waste of time and energy for anyone to argue any position counter to the board's goals.


Agreed.

It was confusing for newbies, though, because the main forum everyone gravitated to was the one titled "LDS Discussion and Debate", and it was even referred to by the Mods as "the debate forum". If you didn't want to be challenged at all, you were encouraged to go to the Fellowship Forum.
_marg

Post by _marg »

liz3564 wrote: It was confusing for newbies, though, because the main forum everyone gravitated to was the one titled "LDS Discussion and Debate", and it was even referred to by the Mods as "the debate forum". If you didn't want to be challenged at all, you were encouraged to go to the Fellowship Forum.


They may have called it a debate board, but it didn't operate as one. A debate occurs when both sides are free to argue their position. That didn't occur there. It operated as an apologist board.
Last edited by _marg on Thu Aug 02, 2007 6:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Yoda

Post by _Yoda »

marg wrote:
liz3564 wrote: It was confusing for newbies, though, because the main forum everyone gravitated to was the one titled "LDS Discussion and Debate", and it was even referred to by the Mods as "the debate forum". If you didn't want to be challenged at all, you were encouraged to go to the Fellowship Forum.


They may have called it a debate board, but it didn't operate as one. A debate occurs when both sides are free to express their position. That didn't occur there. It operated as an apologist board.


At least they're more honest about the type of board it is now. LOL

And "MAD" is a very fitting acronym. ;)
_Tal Bachman
_Emeritus
Posts: 484
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 8:05 pm

Post by _Tal Bachman »

Just got back from out of town, and am leaving tomorrow for Europe for two weeks. I'll post again when I'm back. Have fun!
_mo-watcher
_Emeritus
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 12:38 am

Post by _mo-watcher »

marg wrote:
mo-watcher wrote: [Sorry Tal, but I find this ironic in light of your appearance on the FAIRboards some time back (perhaps a couple of years ago), when you would post your thoughts & completely ignore all serious counter-arguments.




The "FAIRboard" in the past when I read it, was not a debate board. It was an apologetic discussion board for the purpose of supporting and promoting Mormonism. I say "was" because I no longer look at it.

To my knowledge it didn't say it was a debate board and the owner/owners made clear it was not a "fair" board.

Participants were not free to argue their position unless it served the goals of the board.

It was pointless, a waste of time and energy for anyone to argue any position counter to the board's goals.


Surely you jest (and I know you are "marg" not "shirley" <g>). I've been an infrequent poster, but very frequent lurker on Mormon message boards for many, many, years. The FAIRboard had debates every single day on a variety of topics. Critics posted & argued their views on a regular basis. This is simply misinformed hogwash.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

mo-watcher wrote:
marg wrote:
mo-watcher wrote: [Sorry Tal, but I find this ironic in light of your appearance on the FAIRboards some time back (perhaps a couple of years ago), when you would post your thoughts & completely ignore all serious counter-arguments.




The "FAIRboard" in the past when I read it, was not a debate board. It was an apologetic discussion board for the purpose of supporting and promoting Mormonism. I say "was" because I no longer look at it.

To my knowledge it didn't say it was a debate board and the owner/owners made clear it was not a "fair" board.

Participants were not free to argue their position unless it served the goals of the board.

It was pointless, a waste of time and energy for anyone to argue any position counter to the board's goals.


Surely you jest (and I know you are "marg" not "shirley" <g>). I've been an infrequent poster, but very frequent lurker on Mormon message boards for many, many, years. The FAIRboard had debates every single day on a variety of topics. Critics posted & argued their views on a regular basis. This is simply misinformed hogwash.


You are entitled to your opinion, mo-watcher. Just as marg and Liz are entitled to theirs. If you don't agree with their opinion, state your reasons why. They will then state their reasons why you are incorrect. Assertions do not arguments make. Calling someone's opinion "misinformed hogwash" is not debate. That is assertion without foundation.

Now try again.
_marg

Post by _marg »

mo-watcher wrote:
Surely you jest (and I know you are "marg" not "shirley" <g>). I've been an infrequent poster, but very frequent lurker on Mormon message boards for many, many, years. The FAIRboard had debates every single day on a variety of topics. Critics posted & argued their views on a regular basis. This is simply misinformed hogwash.


This is off topic to this thread. However you had written an ad hominem against Tal and since the mods allowed it, which in my opinion they should not have being as this is a heavily moderated thread and ad hominems should not be allowed, I commented to give reason why he or any other critic may write on the board as you noted but then choose to not respond further.

Debates with critics, occur on topic only if all parties are free to express their points on that topic.and all proceed with intellectual honesty. The fact that the "fairboard" acknowledged in its rules that it was not a "fair" board warrants my point that is/was not a debate board and least not one which allowed unrestricted critical debate from critics. There may have been topics the Mods allowed and it may have seemed like a debate board, but it operated as a Mormon apologetic board and critics who are/were too challenging, too outspoken are/were harrassed, censored or restricted as to what they might say and argue on point.

When people are banned or queued on that board, they are not allowed to give their final say, so many leave silently. Sure there are critics there, but they've learned to play the "restricted" game which does not allow intellectual honesty.

Had Tal continued with responses, it would have been likely he would have been dog piled on, or the mods would have harassed, if what he said ran counter to the board's purpose. I say that based on observation and personal experience.

by the way, I'm not being critical of the board. Now if you want to discuss further this issue, I suggest you start a new thread. If you have anything to add to the issues presented in this thread essentially the "theory of knowledge" then do so.
_mo-watcher
_Emeritus
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 12:38 am

Post by _mo-watcher »

So you tacitly concede that "debate" was allowed on the FAIRboards; your beef is with "intellectual honesty" -- please support your "assertion" with argumentation.

And thanks for the mind reading (or, at the very least, fortune-telling) that Tal would have been dogpiled if he continued posting. Is this another "assertion" because I see no argument, no evidence, no analysis. Give me a break.

I never once claimed that Tal's arguments were sound or flawed. I never said if I enjoyed his posts or despised them. I simply noted my observation that he failed to engage rebutalls to his arguments. I find his comments, therefore, to Dan Peterson (in this thread) ironic.
_Bond...James Bond
_Emeritus
Posts: 4627
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am

Post by _Bond...James Bond »

So is this thread dead....do I need to unsticky it?

Or were people promising a few more responses.....
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Post Reply