• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

The Debate Hall Social Thread

Reaver197

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
Messages
1,287
Ah, yeah. I think the traffic is bringing the blog down or something, or it got removed. The whole thing is posted in the comment section. If you search by "top" it should be there.

Sorry about that.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Why would I want to work non-exact when I don't have to?
The only reason the real world requires approximations is because you can't have things like steel bars with thickness Sqrt(2) mm.


And there is a difference between "can't be applied" and "won't be applied". A lot of mathematical topics have real world applications, yes. but that doesn't mean the mathematician is necessarily interested in them.
for example, let's looks at the millennium problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Prize_Problems

now I'm not going over them one by one, but 3 of the 7 are pure mathematics with no application. the most famous one being the (proven) poincare conjecture (I suppose I should say theorem now), which deals with 4-dimensional spheres.

And btw I'm very well aware how all the subjects I follow are (or at least could) be applied irl.
 

Sucumbio

Smash Giant
Moderator
Writing Team
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
8,254
Location
Icerim Mountains
Page not found
Sorry, the page you were looking for in the blog For the Love of YA (Reviews & Author Interviews) does not exist.

LOL! On an article about censorship, no less. I believe we call this IRONY!!!

Then again it could just be a malfunction of the link, but still... heh.
 

Sucumbio

Smash Giant
Moderator
Writing Team
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
8,254
Location
Icerim Mountains
why, thank you dear. *reads*

EDIT:

My goodness, what an ordeal. As an aspiring English teacher this makes me wonder just how much teachers can get away with. The teacher was obviously not expecting this kind of reaction... and I live in the DEEP south, not Kentucky, Mississippi. Oh lawd! I guess I can rule out any gay/lesbian literature.

Of course now I want to read the book that started the whole debacle so that I can judge for myself just how inappropriate it was.

I read some of the blogs regarding the incident, one stood out:

But my son has better things to do than "explore the world of children sexually abusing other children" during our literature time together.

I joined the forum so I could respond to the poster, but there's a waiting period.

Meanwhile, my thoughts on this poster's comment boil down to "like what?" She's a home-school mother, which I find to be a problematic method of teaching to begin with. But that comment just seems fairly ignorant. Just about everyone on that board agrees with the decision to ban the book(s).
 

blazedaces

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
1,150
Location
philly, PA, aim: blazedaces, msg me and we'll play
Pretty amazing find, I emailed that story to quite a few friends. Thanks for sharing it.

Why would I want to work non-exact when I don't have to?
The only reason the real world requires approximations is because you can't have things like steel bars with thickness Sqrt(2) mm.
What's the difference again I ask? You use whatever works best for you. In probability it's a lot easier to compare decimals than comparing fractions. 60/456 compared to 1/9, which is greater? It's easier to compare the probabilities in decimal form. And if the probability involve exponential and other irrational functions, much easier to use approximations. There are always benefits, no one system works all the time.

And there is a difference between "can't be applied" and "won't be applied". A lot of mathematical topics have real world applications, yes. but that doesn't mean the mathematician is necessarily interested in them.
for example, let's looks at the millennium problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Prize_Problems

now I'm not going over them one by one, but 3 of the 7 are pure mathematics with no application. the most famous one being the (proven) poincare conjecture (I suppose I should say theorem now), which deals with 4-dimensional spheres.

And btw I'm very well aware how all the subjects I follow are (or at least could) be applied irl.
In my opinion, the only value math has is its applications to the real world. The only reason I personally wouldn't tell mathematicians not to concern themselves with those subjects is because as you said, even if it isn't obvious at the moment the information found by studying those problems could lead to real-world applications.

But I understand that's my opinion and many would disagree with me.

-blazed
 

adumbrodeus

Smash Legend
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Messages
11,321
Location
Tri-state area
Blaz...

You're making me rage so hard right now.



Now then, understand that in math, we define a framework, and then when working in that framework we discover the implications of said framework. Fractions were one such defined framework, but can you say the ability to represent division in that fashion isn't useful?


Why do we define new frameworks? Because they allow us to work with things that were impossible for us to work with before, and ultimately allow us to better describe what exists in a mathematical fashion. In other words, it's useful.


That's why we switched from the integer set to the real number set, and that's why the complex number set exists, (even though this might not have been the original objective) to describe increasingly complex phenomenon.


I'll leave you with one final thing, a site explaining the real world uses of imaginary and complex numbers, or at least a lot of them.
 

blazedaces

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
1,150
Location
philly, PA, aim: blazedaces, msg me and we'll play
Blaz...

You're making me rage so hard right now.



Now then, understand that in math, we define a framework, and then when working in that framework we discover the implications of said framework. Fractions were one such defined framework, but can you say the ability to represent division in that fashion isn't useful?


Why do we define new frameworks? Because they allow us to work with things that were impossible for us to work with before, and ultimately allow us to better describe what exists in a mathematical fashion. In other words, it's useful.


That's why we switched from the integer set to the real number set, and that's why the complex number set exists, (even though this might not have been the original objective) to describe increasingly complex phenomenon.


I'll leave you with one final thing, a site explaining the real world uses of imaginary and complex numbers, or at least a lot of them.
Listen guys, maybe I'm not communicating myself correctly.

I AM an engineer. I know more than most people how incredibly useful imaginary numbers are in the real world. But you're agreeing with me even more. The imaginary domain is just a "framework" we use to represent numbers differently. That's my point. Currently, we don't teach children this fact.

That's what the imaginary domain is... a "framework" which helps us to visualize and utilize certain numbers in a way we can not do in the "real" domain. That's all it is... there's nothing super special about it. What is i? It's a constant! It does not change in time. We all know the word "imaginary" is a misnomer.

Let's move on, I feel this subject has run its course...

-blazed
 

Reaver197

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
Messages
1,287
You have to realize that the second article's results were from a poll of Scientific American and Nature readers, not the general public, so that's something to keep in mind when discussing it.

Scientists are just people, so they are subject to all the same shortcomings and biases that people can and will have. However, I believe that overall, due to the nature of the scientific method, scientists will tend to be more self-correcting and accurate than any other profession or job type.

Edit: Also found an interesting video about how a town in England tested turning off their stop lights for regulating a normally heavily congested intersection, and just letting the drivers sort it out for themselves. It was so successful at cutting down congestion and wait time, they now have the lights permanently off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vi0meiActlU
 

Bob Jane T-Mart

Smash Ace
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
886
Location
Somewhere
It's very interesting. It's very counter-inutitive, but it seems to work. I'm not sure if it should be done for all intersections, but it should be done for many.
 

GoldShadow

Marsilea quadrifolia
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 6, 2003
Messages
14,463
Location
Location: Location
That's the same approach a lot of developing countries use. And by "a lot," I mean India, since that's the only one where I've really personally seen it (actually, they have traffic lights, which are entirely ignored). I'm sure many other countries have the same system, though. Probably not intentional as in that example, however.
 

Sucumbio

Smash Giant
Moderator
Writing Team
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
8,254
Location
Icerim Mountains
PG always seems more active. Your point is actually the basis behind the idea that the PG should be merged with the DH (e.g. eliminated), but "activity" should not be confused with "quality" and this is the only real reason that it has remained a sub-forum. Also as a DH member you are free to post in the PG if you see a coaching opportunity or an otherwise obvious mistake that someone is making. What we do ask is that you refrain from holding actual debates with other DH members. If you see a topic that interests you, you may re-create here in the DH.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
could we not just change it so that only debaters can make threads and new members can only post in treads?
 

Sucumbio

Smash Giant
Moderator
Writing Team
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
8,254
Location
Icerim Mountains
could we not just change it so that only debaters can make threads and new members can only post in treads?
One of the things PG's -should- practice is making successful debate topics. Though this point isn't stressed (enough imho) you can tell a "good" topic from a "fair" topic pretty quickly. Good topics last a while, or at least engage in a vigorous debate. Fair topics tend to be more ... opinion-based with less emphasis on research and citation and more on cognition. Some could say this is even a problem in the DH but from my eyes any activity is better than none.
 

Bob Jane T-Mart

Smash Ace
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
886
Location
Somewhere
I was wondering if there would be room for a thread on voluntary euthanasia. Would such a thread be a good idea?

I'm interested in the idea, not because I want to do it, but because it seems like a controversial issue that no-one in here has really talked about (at least recently).
 

Sucumbio

Smash Giant
Moderator
Writing Team
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
8,254
Location
Icerim Mountains
I'm interested in the idea, not because I want to do it, but because it seems like a controversial issue that no-one in here has really talked about (at least recently).
:laugh: Ya SURE you don't want to do it :p
I needed that, thanks man... rough night at work.

Yeah go for it! I'll participate, though I can tell you right now I think it's perfectly fine to both choose it as an option, and to be a practitioner like Dr. Death.
 

Bob Jane T-Mart

Smash Ace
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
886
Location
Somewhere
:laugh: Ya SURE you don't want to do it :p
I needed that, thanks man... rough night at work.

Yeah go for it! I'll participate, though I can tell you right now I think it's perfectly fine to both choose it as an option, and to be a practitioner like Dr. Death.
I meant that I wasn't suicidal thoughts. I should get a post up soon.
 

#HBC | Dark Horse

Mach-Hommy x Murakami
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
3,739
[color=c65f6]Just a couple of questions:

Would you consider "appeal to fallacies" a logical fallacy?

What about "appeal to the bible (using the bible to prove something)"?[/color]
 

rvkevin

Smash Lord
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
1,188
[color=c65f6]Just a couple of questions:

Would you consider "appeal to fallacies" a logical fallacy?

What about "appeal to the bible (using the bible to prove something)"?[/color]
1. Yes. Stating a logical fallacy that is not a relevant objection would basically be a straw man fallacy.

2. You would need to establish its veracity. Otherwise, it would be an appeal to authority. Other fallacies could come into play depending on the claim (i.e. circular reasoning, the Bible shows that the Bible is correct)
 

Bob Jane T-Mart

Smash Ace
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
886
Location
Somewhere
1. Yes. Stating a logical fallacy that is not a relevant objection would basically be a straw man fallacy.

2. You would need to establish its veracity. Otherwise, it would be an appeal to authority. Other fallacies could come into play depending on the claim (i.e. circular reasoning, the Bible shows that the Bible is correct)
The latter is circular. I utterly hate it. The sad thing is, that people actually subscribe to this.
 

Dre89

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
6,158
Location
Australia
NNID
Dre4789
Only fideists and uneducated theists appeal the Bible fallaciously.

What's more annoying are all the atheists here who think theology is based off that fallacy.
 

Reaver197

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
Messages
1,287
I have yet to find that to not be the case, especially when it comes to deciding which religion their "god" comes from, or finds attributes from (like there being only one, or many, for example).

Also, to quote smbc: "Can god create a degree so useless even he can't get a job with it?"
 

#HBC | Dark Horse

Mach-Hommy x Murakami
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
3,739
I have yet to find that to not be the case, especially when it comes to deciding which religion their "god" comes from, or finds attributes from (like there being only one, or many, for example).

Also, to quote smbc: "Can god create a degree so useless even he can't get a job with it?"
Are you talki to dre, or me?
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
I have yet to find that to not be the case, especially when it comes to deciding which religion their "god" comes from, or finds attributes from (like there being only one, or many, for example).

Also, to quote smbc: "Can god create a degree so useless even he can't get a job with it?"
<3 SMBC so much.

I generally, however, will take issue to historical sources backing things that are scientifically impossible. ESPECIALLY when you consider that the entire next age was marked by a ridiculously brutal christian purges and the inquisition.
 

Dre89

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
6,158
Location
Australia
NNID
Dre4789
I know you're stealth insulting me, dre.

Name an example of where it isn't.
Um perhaps all of Catholic philosophy?

You do know the difference between Catholic philosophy and theology right?

You shouldn't be shifting the burden of proof onto me anyway, because you were the one who made the initial claim.

If you're going to say Catholics commit the circular Bible fallacy, show evidence of it.

If making the initial statement shifts the BoP onto the opposition, then I can just say "God exists" and then the BoP would on you to prove me wrong, but that's obviously not how it works.

I love how atheists always shift the BoP onto theists, even when they make the initial attack, because they haven't actually studied philosophy or theology, so they can't cite examples.
 

Dragoon Fighter

Smash Lord
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
1,915
You shouldn't be shifting the burden of proof onto me anyway, because you were the one who made the initial claim.
If you're going to say Catholics commit the circular Bible fallacy, show evidence of it.
I do agree with Dre here if we make the claim we need to back it up.
Though a lot of catholics I have meet do commit that fallacy to say the general statement "Catholics commit the circular Bible fallacy" would be a fallacy in its self (Proof by example I do believe, I would have to look it up, it has been awhile.)

If making the initial statement shifts the BoP onto the opposition, then I can just say "God exists" and then the BoP would on you to prove me wrong, but that's obviously not how it works.
I agree.

I love how atheists always shift the BoP onto theists, even when they make the initial attack, because they haven't actually studied philosophy or theology, so they can't cite examples.
Um...That is the exact same fallacy that Dark Horse made in the post you responded to.
 
Top Bottom