Debates

Moderator: Littlabit

Goofydoofy
Ride a cowboy, save a horse
Posts: 4692
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Bullhead City, AZ, USA
Contact:

Debates

Postby Goofydoofy » Tue Feb 28, 2006 11:53 am

This quote reminded me of our last debate.


'The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement'


I personally like debating stuff. I was renowned for it when I was in Tribal Fury.
Last edited by Goofydoofy on Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Level 105 Druid, Level 105 Enchanter, Level 105 Paladin
Drinal - Maelin Starpyre Server

User avatar
Ommina
Whee!
Posts: 3916
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 1:26 pm
Location: ömniöüs

RE: Debates

Postby Ommina » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:32 pm

That's a good quote. A solid quote. With it I cannot disagree.

So I guess we'll gain no knowledge here.

The challenge, of course, is when participants of debates see opposing views as a personal attack against their sensibilities. Or assume that an opposing view is necessarily wrong simply on the face of it.

I speak here, of course, on subjects where there exists some level of uncertainty. If somebody is going to argue for a flat earth, or TimeCube, I'm going to call them an idiot, no matter what.
Image

Szork
Whee!
Posts: 1112
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:52 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

RE: Debates

Postby Szork » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:11 pm

The world IS flat (in spherical polar coordinates). Entirely solveable with linear equations.

Siderius
Kim Son Quang
Posts: 1340
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:09 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

RE: Debates

Postby Siderius » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:40 pm

I disagree with that quote, I do gain knowledge studying without disagreeing with anyone.. change entirely with mostly I would be more likely to agree.
[75 Wildblood] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=666907">Tarjei</a>(Iksar)
[75 Grand Arcanist] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=664788">Siderius</a> (Gnome)

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
-- Stephen Roberts

Goofydoofy
Ride a cowboy, save a horse
Posts: 4692
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Bullhead City, AZ, USA
Contact:

Postby Goofydoofy » Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:30 pm

Give me a couple cocktails and I can argue, I mean debate, about anything!
Level 105 Druid, Level 105 Enchanter, Level 105 Paladin
Drinal - Maelin Starpyre Server

Dracocan
Whee!
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:52 pm
Contact:

Postby Dracocan » Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:07 pm

But who says you are studying Correct information? The only way we found new information is we disagreed with old logic, and found that we were wrong. So you may not disagree, but it could mean your agreeing with false information, and therefor not learning? :D

Dracocan
Whee!
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:52 pm
Contact:

Postby Dracocan » Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:07 pm

But who says you are studying Correct information? The only way we found new information is we disagreed with old logic, and found that we were wrong. So you may not disagree, but it could mean your agreeing with false information, and therefor not learning? :D

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:38 pm

Well I am not sure that we need to disagree in order to learn, I do think we have to be willing to accept alternate opinions rather than attack out of ignorance. Just because I do not agree with something does not make me right (or wrong:))

User avatar
Ommina
Whee!
Posts: 3916
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 1:26 pm
Location: ömniöüs

Postby Ommina » Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:41 pm

Szork wrote:The world IS flat (in spherical polar coordinates). Entirely solveable with linear equations.


There - see? Already knowledge is being gained. Within hours of the original post, I'm off learing what the heck spherical polar coordinates are.

Ain't progress grand!

Edit: spelling

Siderius
Kim Son Quang
Posts: 1340
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:09 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Postby Siderius » Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:06 am

Did you learn what they are Ommina or just that they exists? :P
[75 Wildblood] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=666907">Tarjei</a>(Iksar)

[75 Grand Arcanist] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=664788">Siderius</a> (Gnome)



"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

-- Stephen Roberts

Siderius
Kim Son Quang
Posts: 1340
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:09 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Postby Siderius » Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:09 am

But who says you are studying Correct information? The only way we found new information is we disagreed with old logic, and found that we were wrong. So you may not disagree, but it could mean your agreeing with false information, and therefor not learning?


Its a good question, basically skeptisism is good to have... and check all the proof's and dont just skip over them is a good start.
[75 Wildblood] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=666907">Tarjei</a>(Iksar)

[75 Grand Arcanist] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=664788">Siderius</a> (Gnome)



"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

-- Stephen Roberts

Tardar
Whee!
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:54 pm
Contact:

Postby Tardar » Wed Mar 01, 2006 3:06 pm

Siderius wrote:
Its a good question, basically skeptisism is good to have... and check all the proof's and dont just skip over them is a good start.


What if there is no proof?

Aubrianna
Whee!
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:31 pm
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Postby Aubrianna » Wed Mar 01, 2006 3:10 pm

Tardar wrote:What if there is no proof?


Depends what kinda proof you want :)
Minstrel Aubrianna Melody
70th Herald - Retired

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Wed Mar 01, 2006 3:55 pm

hey if you look at all the ppicture taken from space - the Earth is flat

Omniox
Whee!
Posts: 169
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 8:12 am
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Postby Omniox » Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:00 pm

EDIT
Last edited by Omniox on Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ommina
Whee!
Posts: 3916
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 1:26 pm
Location: ömniöüs

Postby Ommina » Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 pm

Omniox wrote:<snip> Read above.


Well, since you asked:

a) gravity
b) 10 divided by 3 is 3 and one third. 3.33 (repeating) is just a side effect of converting to decimal. Switch to base-3 and the problem goes away.
c) Not quite sure what you mean about the prime numbers...

Siderius wrote:Did you learn what they are Ommina or just that they exists?


Well, best I can tell, they are a method of describing a sphere so that linear equations can be used. Which is to say, the world is flat if we use a coordinate system that describes it as such.

Am I close?

Omniox
Whee!
Posts: 169
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 8:12 am
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Postby Omniox » Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:21 pm

EDIT
Last edited by Omniox on Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Siderius
Kim Son Quang
Posts: 1340
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:09 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Postby Siderius » Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:59 pm

This was not about debating or not heh.. this was about wether disagreeing was neccesary to learn.
[75 Wildblood] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=666907">Tarjei</a>(Iksar)

[75 Grand Arcanist] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=664788">Siderius</a> (Gnome)



"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

-- Stephen Roberts

Siderius
Kim Son Quang
Posts: 1340
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:09 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Postby Siderius » Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:06 pm

Well, best I can tell, they are a method of describing a sphere so that linear equations can be used. Which is to say, the world is flat if we use a coordinate system that describes it as such.

Am I close?


Yeah you are hehe. I have a question for Szork tho. You say spherical polar coordinates, is that the same as normal polar coordinates that we have in calculus or are they more complicated hehe.
Normal ones are explained here:http://archives.math.utk.edu/visual.calculus/0/polar.6/index.html
Do you add another dimmension to get a sphere? like addind a z in normal coordinates to get 3d?
Hope you understand my question
[75 Wildblood] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=666907">Tarjei</a>(Iksar)

[75 Grand Arcanist] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=664788">Siderius</a> (Gnome)



"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

-- Stephen Roberts

Aubrianna
Whee!
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:31 pm
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Postby Aubrianna » Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:10 pm

I think Szork just means you can describe a sphere by using a system of linear vecters in R3, which just means 3d. So yeah, X, Y, and Z axis. Thats just how I picture it, Szork is probably thinking differently (sounds like he has actual experience in this stuff, I'm still in the theory of learning).
Minstrel Aubrianna Melody

70th Herald - Retired

Szork
Whee!
Posts: 1112
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:52 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Postby Szork » Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:02 am

Yes, to both Sid and Aubri. Polar coordinates can be applied to n-dimensional space, and spherical is the 3D case. It is often represented by a vector lengh (radius), angle with respect to x axis in xy plane (theta), and the angle with respect to z axis in the angled plane (phi). http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SphericalCoordinates.html

Tardar asked earlier "what if there is not proof." If you believe something without proof, it's called faith. Not to be confused with knowledge, which must be proven.[/url]

User avatar
Cruz
Whee!
Posts: 803
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:50 am
Location: Tucson, Arizona (USA)

Postby Cruz » Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:17 am

Proof (knowldege) is also usualy a form of faith. Faith in the scientific method, which has had many very public failures (usualy do to human failings).

Siderius
Kim Son Quang
Posts: 1340
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:09 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Postby Siderius » Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:27 am

I will not agee that the Scientific Method itself has had any failures... its something completely different if theories and hypothesis is falsified.. that shows the scientific method works.

Is it faith to beleive that if you release a stone from above the floor it will fall down?

EDITED: Put in a stone.. wtf was I talking about. hehe
Last edited by Siderius on Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
[75 Wildblood] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=666907">Tarjei</a>(Iksar)

[75 Grand Arcanist] <a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=664788">Siderius</a> (Gnome)



"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

-- Stephen Roberts

User avatar
Cruz
Whee!
Posts: 803
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:50 am
Location: Tucson, Arizona (USA)

Postby Cruz » Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:42 am

Is it faith to believe that if you release a above the floor it will fall down?


Fist off this is anecdotal evidence and there are many situations where an object that is dropped will not fall down (in orbit as in a few other situations). Collections of anecdotal evidence make up common sense (more or less) and have nothing to do with proof. Physics has gone through many phases of understanding of the physical world. They 'work' in the anecdotal sense, but are supplanted by newer understanding. The strength is that the scientific method can change and understanding is not static.

If the 'truth' or the proof becomes supplanted (do to better testing or better measurements), then was the original understanding false? The same method produced the earlier understanding.

So at any single point you are getting the 'best' fit for the anecdotal evidence. Further research will change this as time passes. I don’t think any branch of science has gotten concrete static answers, with the exception of some of math perhaps (but it is just a convenient artificial construct we use anyhow).

Lanyder
Whee!
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:50 am
Contact:

Postby Lanyder » Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:48 am

The original quote mentioned growth of knowledge, not the transfer of existing knowledge. Learning is acquistion of knowledge. I am also not sure the knowledge is necessarily correct, right and wrong are based on perception not absolutes. I do believe that growth of knowledge requires dissagreement. I can fly, no you can't....one way is going to be proven.