Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Search:

Type: Posts; User: mican333; Keyword(s):

Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.17 seconds.

  1. Re: Protected Classes: Expand, Reduce or Maintain?

    First off, I don't agree that transgendered is not legally defined. I did a search and found a legal definition.

    "The state of a person's gender identity (self-identification as male or female)...
  2. Re: Protected Classes: Expand, Reduce or Maintain?

    The facts do not support your conclusion.

    What I see is a new and unique legal issue, where the primary concept "transgenderism" is kind of vague so there will be gradual changes to legal...
  3. Re: Protected Classes: Expand, Reduce or Maintain?

    Upon looking it up, you are correct on that point and I was incorrect so I retract my statement regarding class.



    If we are going to discuss barring people based on their looks then "looks" is...
  4. Re: Protected Classes: Expand, Reduce or Maintain?

    And I disagree on that. From my perspective, they are not open-ended and the restrictions are quite specific and I've seen no supported position that it will lead to anything else in particular. ...
  5. Re: Protected Classes: Expand, Reduce or Maintain?

    First off, there are no protected classes.

    Regarding race, the rule is not that one cannot discriminate against blacks. The rule is that one cannot discriminate against people based on race. So...
  6. Re: Protected Classes: Expand, Reduce or Maintain?

    I think you have to disagree with my premises before I have any need to support them.

    To be clear, I'm not saying that you need to offer support for your disagreement (to say would be shifting the...
  7. Re: Protected Classes: Expand, Reduce or Maintain?

    Then you are not addressing my argument and therefore are not really rebutting it.



    I didn't argue otherwise. What I said was:

    "And the way society promotes certain moral positions is by...
  8. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Yes.

    And you don't need to ask me if I agree. Just make your arguments and let one follow the other and if you say anything that I disagree with, I will tell you that I disagree and likewise if I...
  9. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    But that's not how I use the word "probable" nor what it typically means. I don't use "probable" as in "there's the slightest probability that what I KNOW to be true might be false" but as "I think...
  10. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    But it doesn't means "probably".

    If think it's probably true, then I would not say I know it's true.

    And if I know it's true, then I would not say that it's probably true.

    So regardless, I...
  11. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    I find this comment to be contradictory so I can't accept it. "Know" indicates certainty and "probably" means uncertainty so we can't know if something is probably true with or without evidence. We...
  12. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    I agree with your main point so just continue with that. I agree that we don't know if it's raining outside or if it's not raining outside without access to information on whether it's raining...
  13. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Sure.

    Although I will say that even if we don't know if it's raining (in a room where one cannot tell what's going on outside), one can make estimate the odds of it raining outside. Since the...
  14. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    I will re-post my last post with the addition that I disagree.



    I disagree that if there is no evidence whatsoever that p is true, then no probability that p is true can be formulated. So...
  15. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Please support this assertion. So far, as far as I can tell, you just repeat it but never explain why I should agree with you. I recommend using a logic chain if you are going to support it.


    ...
  16. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Yes it does. Here it is again with the pertinent part bolded.

    "If there is no evidence that X is true and there is no evidence that X is not true, then the amount of evidence for or against X...
  17. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Since we are discussing specifically premise 2, I think the best way to word the question would be:

    "Does Premise 2 indicate that if there is no evidence for p and no evidence for ~p, then the...
  18. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    You can't say anything about the evidence being equal or unequal if there is no evidence at all.

    It's like discussing the relative merits of two employees when you have no employees.

    But you...
  19. Replies
    434
    Views
    25,798

    Re: Theistic beliefs are not rationally justified

    It's the one that I'm putting forward. Taken to its logical conclusion, as long as it's possible for life to exist in a universe, life WILL exist. As long as this kind of multiverse could possibly...
  20. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    No, I did not say that. You have misquoted me by leaving out a very pertinent word. I said "If there is no evidence that X is true and there is no evidence that X is not true, then the amount of...
  21. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Red Herring. That is not what is going on here. We are discussing the relative likelihood of two opposing notions being true and therefore we are analyzing hypothetical guesses and therefore...
  22. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    But that goes for both sides of an issue.

    If the proposition that ghosts exist requires evidence before the proposition can be considered rational, then the proposition that ghost DON'T exist...
  23. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    And that applies to BOTH sides of an issue. If I can't make a rational guess at "heads" then I can't make a rational guess at "tails" either. And if I can't formulate a rational belief that ghosts...
  24. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Wrong. Two cups with no water in them have the same amount of water in them. So it is perfectly fine to posit that two things with nothing in them, be it no water, no sand, or no evidence, have...
  25. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    I doubt that I have misused it. But I will consider your analogy to be discarded unless you want to discuss it further.



    Logic.

    I'll introduce a logic chain to back up my position.

    1. If...
  26. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Because that is the logical conclusion of your "slips of paper in the hat" analogy.

    YOUR analogy has 101 slips of paper ranging from 0 to 100 with just one slip saying "50%". The rest are evenly...
  27. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Okay. There's a 0% probable slip, 1% probable slip, 2% probable slip and so on all the way up to 100% probable. And of course I don't know in advance which coin will be drawn and therefore how the...
  28. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Let me take this step by step.

    The slips of paper in the hat represent variables regarding the coin. So the "90% heads" represents alterations in the coin (such as being weighted) that will make...
  29. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    Actually, my statement is "I believe it is just as likely to land heads as it is to land tails". So 0.5 probably it lands heads and 0.5 probable that it lands tails.



    Right. But then with no...
  30. Thread: Supernatural?

    by mican333
    Replies
    212
    Views
    5,554

    Re: Supernatural?

    My claim is that I have no evidence that it will land heads instead of tails. Or maybe to put more succinctly, I have no reason to think that is it more likely to land on heads than it is to land on...
Results 1 to 30 of 250
Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 4