Proposal: The Scientific Method is useless.

Discussion in 'Formal debates' started by scifes, Mar 12, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. scifes heckle the snobs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,561
    o~k,
    this is one hook i've been wanting to hang geoffp by for quite some time;
    so, this formal debate proposal is directed only at Geoffp, who i usually mollycoddle by G.

    the statement to debate is:
    "The Scientific Method is useless".
    the statement will be handled in an absolute, objective manner.
    i'm for he's against.

    the debate is open time wise, same for number of posts, and G would really have me gritting my teeth if he did the smart thing and turned down my challenge.

    background story starts here;
    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2651996&postcount=33
    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2652011&postcount=34
    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2652033&postcount=35

    then it unfolds some more in later pages of that thread, if anyone is interested.

    the reason i let this debate with a personal motive be held in "formal debates", is because i believe it will be worthwhile and rich even if it was stripped of the parts pertaining to the participants and their posting history.

    of course i guess it goes without saying that this debate is philosophical/religious in nature and not scientific.

    so G, will you hand me your ankles or not?

    questions?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,740
    This ought to be good, the results of the scientific method are rather striking and ubiquitous.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,122
    Scifes, I think you've lost your mind. You're certainly going to lose your debate, but good luck anyhow...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,524
    Scifes must have run out of windmills to attack.
     
  8. scifes heckle the snobs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,561
    ever thought why i specifically chose G for this?[other than that i love him so much]

    hmm, though come to think of it, this might go out of hand......
    ....mmm no i can't really see how it could, which will make it even more interesting, just sit down and watch..

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    humph, says the guy who views life as nothing but windmill-attacking.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. scifes heckle the snobs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,561
    upon reconsidering, the personal aspect is what the whole argument in this thread will be based upon, so...uh...

    anyway, i promise i won't flame or insult in this thread, well, not unintellectually at least. it's going to be a battle, but not a foul one.
     
  10. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,740
    Useless for what purpose? If our purpose is to serve God, then science is just a novelty used to make Earth a more pleasant waiting room for eternity.
     
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,360
    scifes:

    You must wait until GeoffP accepts your challenge before opening the Debate thread.

    Also, the debate cannot be open-ended. It must be limited by number of posts and/or time.
     
  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,360
    **** Moderator note: 11 off-topic posts have been deleted.

    Posters are asked to read the rules of the Formal Debates subforum before posting here. (see sticky thread at the top of the subforum topic list).
     
  13. scifes heckle the snobs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,561
    ok, ten posts each.
    though i hope it doesn't reach that much.
     
  14. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Is G God?
     
  15. scifes heckle the snobs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,561
    no, G is for Go read the op before posting.
     
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,360
    No response from GeoffP. Maybe you ought to PM him to let him know this thread is here.
     
  17. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Huh. Well, scifes has inadvertently picked about the worst fucking time imaginable for it, because I'm so busy I'll probably never get out of it.

    I'll think about it until Friday; if I'm not back to you by then, remind me via PM. If someone else has the time, they can be my locum.
     
  18. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    And yes, G is God.
     
  19. Hercules Rockefeller Beatings will continue until morale improves. Moderator

    Messages:
    2,720

    What!?!? It doesn’t go without saying at all!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The scientific method has everything to do with science and nothing to do with philosophy and religion.
     
  20. scifes heckle the snobs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,561
    na'a, it's gotta be you

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    ok, then g will be Geoffp

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    true, but the usefulness of something is truly a philosophical matter

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. Mr MacGillivray Banned Banned

    Messages:
    527
    You should define useless before you start.
     
  22. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Shh! Heh. Ah well, I expect scifes kind of expected I'd bring that up.

    Plan B.

    I wonder. I mean, I know what he's planning to say about it, but if we take that away in definition at the start of the thread, what's left?

    What the hell. I accept, being arguably the worst philosopher on the forums, and expecting the entire thread to be mired down within the first three series of posts.

    Why don't you start, scifes? Do your worst. Or, preferably even a little better than than.
     
  23. Hercules Rockefeller Beatings will continue until morale improves. Moderator

    Messages:
    2,720
    I have closed the Debate thread as no definitive agreement on the debate format has been reached, as far as I can tell. Scifes, please post some definitive rules. If/when GP agrees, the debate thread will be reopened. You may want to change your opening post in light of the formally agreed rules. I suggest you need agreement on at least the following:

    -- Participants
    -- Debate title
    -- Definition of terms/scope of debate
    -- Number of posts from each side
    -- Format of posts
    -- Length restrictions, if any
    -- Requirement for supporting evidence?

    Or, you can agree to adopt Sciforums’s Standard rules for debates.

    I’d start with the debate title. Clearly the scientific method is not useless; it’s used every minute of every day, so it has a use. So the debate is lost for the affirmative before you even start. As it stands, to me it looks like a big waste of time.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page