Pointless debates and fruitless discussion

[جوري]

That's cool because it's not a pointless debate, it's educational.

I was referring more to silly debates where no side gives in, are more about point-scoring than truth, and which don't even matter in the long run.

Yes.. people get emotionally charged, or upset.. they take it personally... I take some posts personally -- If you'd get to the root of it, you might find the reason a debate got heated isn't even the topic itself--

I am not writing this to defend my position, rather explain why things spiraled to this point-- fact is, I wasn't going to partake in the whole debate, except one post I found rather condescending from the start, as if someone has all the knowledge of the cosmos and is coming to teach us vagabonds the ways of the world ( I find that to be a common symptom on most any forum) Someone reads a book or two, it touches them in a particular way, it becomes their crusade and new religion!--
What I can't tolerate is injustice toward a fellow Muslim-- not whether or not someone believes in G-D.. Genuinely I don't give a rats A$$.. and I have no interest at all in extending du'wah to anyone...

So, that is my Achilles -- I exerted some minor efforts in the evolution not (creationists dealt a blow thread)... it wasn't until a Muslim member from the forum gathered all the threads on evolution and put them under one post that I started browsing through it.. and I found two members in particular with an ongoing cruel and cutting stylistic edge to their writing... Which made me pick on one in particular-- on the account it was grossly in error from a scientific stand point.. what is worst I ask than error laced with condescension?

The few things I got out of it:
1-Hopefully proving that having a good grip on English, and the "vulgar tongue" doesn't qualify you as a scientist.. nor is cutting and pasting someone else's research so when questioned about the most basic of concepts in a way to communicate it to others seems daunting..
2- using cruel language to chastise a member isn't acceptable such as with this particular post

Why don't you actually learn about evolution before getting involved in a discussion about it? That might stop you from getting so confused all the time.

I personally didn't take the above, though not directed at me, to be a kind response to someone genuinely asking a question.
3- Lastly the title in and of itself was convoluted as if an epiphany, and it turned out to be a wowser only from the opposite end of the spectrum...

on the con side
It was an absolute waste of my time... But I hope some passer by somewhere gains something from it? and with this I hope I have cleared at least my position as to why? & hopefully you'll have concluded that it isn't about scoring, rather a taste of their own medicine...

 

[جوري]

Re: Creationists dealt a blow

Nice picture of GBW..

lol so true... perhaps he is the missing link?

I don't think that is the reason so many get so heated up. I believe the reason is much deeper.

Indeed-- nothing gets by you.. I suppose because insight into people's psyche is yours by profession-- where you might sincerely feel, none of it should inspire more than a shrug of the shoulders, I have stated my genuine reasons above...

 

[snakelegs]

Re: Creationists dealt a blow

Yeah, but why do people want to impose it? They act as if it's such an important scientific discovery when really, it has very little practical use whatsoever. It's trivia in the long run, when it comes to living our lives right here and now. It's meaningless conflict that will never be resolved because when it comes down to it, it doesn't really matter where we came from; what matters is where we're heading.

i agree. i've heard these heated debates on and off for years. because it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other, it almost sounds like a debate between 2 religions - the "science" side vs. the "religious" side.
silly when there are so many better things to do.

 

[MustafaMc]

Re: Creationists dealt a blow

It still doesn't change the fact that people will believe what they like. True, we might think of people with opposing beliefs as fools, but has anyone actually ever been conviced on either side of this particular fence by arguments from the other? Seems that people's beliefs on each side are so entrenched that the entire conflict is meaningless.

I don't think that those who don't believe the way that I believe are fools. I believe some non-Muslim members are misguided and that they are striving to misguide others, particularly young impressionable Muslims. This is apparent in posts by some atheists (evolutionists) and some Christians. I also don't see this debate as mindless scoring points against the other side, but as legitimate debate.

I have thought about the arguments put forward by both evolutionists and Christians way more than your average Muslim. Consequently, you might call me sensitive to their arguments that are directly contrary to my deeply held beliefs. You are right, however, that debate is not likely to convince the other side that one is right.

 

[Muezzin]

Re: Creationists dealt a blow

Wow, two pages of debate about... pointless debate!

I don't think that those who don't believe the way that I believe are fools. I believe some non-Muslim members are misguided and that they are striving to misguide others, particularly young impressionable Muslims. This is apparent in posts by some atheists (evolutionists) and some Christians. I also don't see this debate as mindless scoring points against the other side, but as legitimate debate.

That's good. You're not a group of the people taking part in the mindless pantomime I seem to see the debate as.

Nontheless, I have seen it degenerate into midless point scoring - in fact, it may well stem from the condescension that PurestAmbrosia noticed; that seems to be the point legitimate debate ends and it becomes a farcical argument.

I have thought about the arguments put forward by both evolutionists and Christians way more than your average Muslim. Consequently, you might call me sensitive to their arguments that are directly contrary to my deeply held beliefs.

I apologise if my frankness may have shaken your efforts somewhat, as that was certainly not my intent. Rather, I wished to point out the absurdity of becoming too emotionally attached to abstract notions that are of little practical value. I tend to have all the tact of a jackhammer which is why my intent gets gobbled up in messages of stressful whining.

You are right, however, that debate is not likely to convince the other side that one is right.

Yeah. I don't think there's anything wrong in defending or refuting facts, but it seems to me that certain people get really fired up because not only are they trying to clarify what they think is true, they also fight to 'convert' others to their cause, maliciously ridiculing them if they dare to think differently. Again, the condescension that PurestAmbrosia mentions is relevant.

 

[MustafaMc]

Re: Creationists dealt a blow

Nontheless, I have seen it degenerate into midless point scoring - in fact, it may well stem from the condescension that PurestAmbrosia noticed; that seems to be the point legitimate debate ends and it becomes a farcical argument.

Thank you for the explanation. I can relate to what you and she are saying.

 

[Pygoscelis]

That's cool because it's not a pointless debate, it's educational.

I was referring more to silly debates where no side gives in, are more about point-scoring than truth, and which don't even matter in the long run.

Few debates matter in the long run. The vast majority of internet "debates" are pointless and go nowhere. As soon as communication online stops being called a discussion and starts being called a debate that's a clear sign that no more good will come of it.

That said, a good internet debate can still be fun. Just take it for what it is - entertainment. I can honestly say I've never been upset by anything on here or other boards. It isn't worth it. You will meet people with polar opposite views and people who get all huffy and upset or people who go out of their way to insult you, but I try to ignore that, or just point out the adhoms and let the people look bad for making them.

I do find that things tend to get heated faster than they should though, even amongst well meaning people online. I attribute that to two things.

First, that its plain text and you therefore will often read a post with inflection that wasn't meant in the writing of it.

Second, the depersonalization of it all. You can type text on a discussion board and never have your face seen or see the faces of the otheers. This is known in psych as deindividuation. Its the same phenomenon that leads masked groups like the KKK into a frenzy so easily. And it is one major factor in "road rage" (if people had to look directly into the eye of everyone they are road raging at, they'd settle down much quicker). This happens to many people without them even noticing it.

 

[sevgi]

Re: Creationists dealt a blow

People are dumb.

i like that...

crude...very crude...

 

[Muslim Knight]

Debates and discussion can invigorate the mind, it keeps it working and prevents falling into disuse. However, too much of incessant discussions and arguing for the sake of argument can be harmful. Similarly we are reminded in Surah Baqarah about the nature of the rebellious Bani Israel who were persistent in they questioning of Prophet Moses, that they were cursed afterwards for their insulting behavior, even after Allah had made things easy for them to deal with.

I found interesting notes about debates. May we all gain benefit from it.

Islaam.com

What Our Scholars Said About Debate
Shaykh Saleh Abdullah bin Humaid
Excerpted from "Islamic Principles and Rules of Debate"
© Al-Manara 1994
http://islaam.com//Article.aspx?id=661

“A debate is only justified to unveil truth, so that the more knowledgeable should impart knowledge to the less knowledgeable, and to stimulate a weaker intellect.” - adh-Dhahabi

“I never talked with someone but sincerely wished that Allah guard him, protect him from sin and misdeed, and guide him; and I never debated with someone but sincerely wished that we would come upon truth, regardless of whether he or I should be the one to think of it first.” - Imam al-Shafi`i

“Cooperation in seeking truth is inherent to religion, but sincerity in the pursuit of truth can be distinguished y certain conditions and signs. A diligent seeker of truth may be compared to one who is looking for his lost camel. It would be immaterial for him if he or another person should be the one to find it. Likewise, a sincere truth-seeker would perceive his partner as a helper rather than an adversary, and would be grateful to him if he should guide him to truth.” - Al-Ghazali

“If quoting, maintain accuracy; if claiming, provide proof.” [An aphorism of Muslim scholars]

“Some scholars used to excuse anyone who disagrees with them in debatable matters, and did not insist that he should accept their view. - Ibn Qudama [Al-Mughni]

“My viewpoint is right, but can be wrong; and my adversary’s viewpoint is wrong, but can be right.” [An aphorism of Muslim scholars]

“I have never debated with a knowledgeable person but beaten him, and I have never debated with an ignorant person but been beaten by him.” - Imam al-Shafi`i

“Let each one of the debaters accept statements of the other party supported with proof. By doing that, he would demonstrate a nobility and self-respect, and he would prove himself to be an acceptor of truth.” - Ibn Akeel

“Over-enthusiasm is a mark of corrupted scholars, even when the case they are defending is true. By showing excessive enthusiasm for truth and their contempt of their opponents, the latter would be stimulated to retaliate and react in the same manner. They would be driven to stand for falsehood and to be true to the label attributed to them…If the champions of truth had spoken kindly to them avoiding publicity and humiliation they would have succeeded in winning them over. But as it is, a person who enjoys a place of prestige is strongly inclined to preserve his position by attracting followers, and the only way to that is to boast and to attack or curse adversaries.” - Al-Ghazali

“I never debate with someone and he accepts my proof except that I hold him in high esteem, and I never debate with someone and he refuses my proof except that I lose all esteem for him.” - Imam al-Shafi`i

“If you sit with scholars, my son, be more interested in listening than in speaking. Learn good listening just as you learn good speaking. Never interrupt a speaker, even if he takes long, until he comes to an end.” -Advice of Al-Hasan ibn Ali (radhiallahu `anhu) to his son.

“Learn good listening just as you learn good speaking. To be a good listener, you should give a speaker time until he concludes, not seeming anxious to reply. Have your face and look in the direction of the speaker and try to understand what he says.” - Ibn al-Muqaffa`

Islaam.com​

To sum it all up, for a Muslim, debates must be used as tool for discerning the truth and not for showing who's right and who's wrong. Personally, I'd come strong and hard but once proven wrong I'd be giving thanks to Allah for having chosen to guide me, rather than leaving me lost in the dark and not finding the true way.

I think there's one Imam that can be attributed to this, I can't remember which one either Imam Ghazali or Imam Shafiie (Allah's Mercy on both of them) who said that he'd be glad to be proven wrong when the truth is pronounced from his opponent's mouth.

Masha Allah!

 

[Muezzin]

Few debates matter in the long run. The vast majority of internet "debates" are pointless and go nowhere. As soon as communication online stops being called a discussion and starts being called a debate that's a clear sign that no more good will come of it.

Very true. I just prefer it when people play nice.

And now that I'm a mod, I can impose that worldview on others, muhahahaha.

That said, a good internet debate can still be fun. Just take it for what it is - entertainment.

See, I don't find it very entertaining. For me, it's too mean-spirited.

But also, the whole evolution debate (not just online) has struck me as rather pointless from the get-go.

I can honestly say I've never been upset by anything on here or other boards. It isn't worth it. You will meet people with polar opposite views and people who get all huffy and upset or people who go out of their way to insult you, but I try to ignore that, or just point out the adhoms and let the people look bad for making them.

Okay.

I do find that things tend to get heated faster than they should though, even amongst well meaning people online. I attribute that to two things.

First, that its plain text and you therefore will often read a post with inflection that wasn't meant in the writing of it.

That's why I use the hell out of emoticons.

Second, the depersonalization of it all. You can type text on a discussion board and never have your face seen or see the faces of the otheers. This is known in psych as deindividuation. Its the same phenomenon that leads masked groups like the KKK into a frenzy so easily. And it is one major factor in "road rage" (if people had to look directly into the eye of everyone they are road raging at, they'd settle down much quicker). This happens to many people without them even noticing it.

You've just successfully psychoanalysed every troll on the I-web!

 

[ranma1/2]

Re: Creationists dealt a blow

Yeah, but why do people want to impose it? They act as if it's such an important scientific discovery when really, it has very little practical use whatsoever. It's trivia in the long run, when it comes to living our lives right here and now. It's meaningless conflict that will never be resolved because when it comes down to it, it doesn't really matter where we came from; what matters is where we're heading.

Actually it has many a practical use, especially in the field of health. The medical industry itself spends millions every year trying to keep up with the new diseases that evolve.

 

[جوري]

Pls tell us more about those diseases that evolve!

 

[ranma1/2]

Pls tell us more about those diseases that evolve!

i usually ignore you but have you heard of aids? flu? the common cold?
avian flu?

 

[جوري]

Yes all of the above mentioned are viruses and viruses aren't living organisms.. we have already explained that to you prior.. I fail to see how evolution applies to non-living organisms!

 

[Keltoi]

It is known that certain bacteria evolve if antibiotics are used too much. I don't know about the evolutionary "evidence" of this reality, but it is known that bacteria will grow resistant to antibiotics.

 

[جوري]

Bacteria might form resistance to a particular antibiotic not unlike the adaptation that goes on in the body... but I challenge anyone that brings me a class of bacteria that has evolved from one class into another
in other words I'd like to see how a gram positive bacteria becomes a gram negative, or a mycoplasma or evolves into a fungus or a virus or a fluke...

 

[Keltoi]

I don't think the issue is whether bacteria evolves into another species, so to speak, but that it adapts to certain environmental elements and changes accordingly.

 

[جوري]

I don't think the issue is whether bacteria evolves into another species, so to speak, but that it adapts to certain environmental elements and changes accordingly.

sure I agree with that.. but that isn't evolution... that is adaptation. I'd get into this in more detail, except I am feeling a bit under the weather..If really need be then I will!

 

[Muslim Knight]

i usually ignore you but have you heard of aids? flu? the common cold?
avian flu?

It is known that certain bacteria evolve if antibiotics are used too much. I don't know about the evolutionary "evidence" of this reality, but it is known that bacteria will grow resistant to antibiotics.

Bacterias aren't viruses! Quit messin' with my head!!

As PurestAmbrosia pointed out, viruses aren't exactly living organism. Deprived of host, they will become dormant in crystallized form. Once introduced to living culture they spring into action. Which is why extreme heat can destroy viruses, but who would heat up a human being just to cure AIDS when you might just kill him outright.

Antiobiotics, on the other hand, work only on bacterias, and not viruses. Which is why using antibiotics against common cold is useless, the doctor will only prescribe something that will cause sleepiness so that the the cold is ignored and eventually overcome by the body's defenses, but it will not directly cure the illness.

 

[Trumble]

Yes all of the above mentioned are viruses and viruses aren't living organisms.. we have already explained that to you prior.. I fail to see how evolution applies to non-living organisms!

As a total layman on such things I would appreciate your comments on the Wiki entry on this subject? Is it incorrect?

Viral evolution is a subfield of evolutionary biology that is specifically concerned with the evolution of viruses. Many viruses, in particular RNA viruses, have short generation times and relatively high mutation rates (on the order of one point mutation or more per genome per round of replication for RNA viruses). This elevated mutation rate, when combined with natural selection, allows viruses to quickly adapt to changes in their host environment.

Viral evolution is an important aspect of the epidemiology of viral diseases such as influenza, HIV, and hepatitis. It also causes problems in the development of successful vaccines and antiviral drugs, as resistant mutations often appear within weeks or months after the beginning of the treatment.

RNA viruses are also used as a model system to study evolution in the laboratory.

One of the main theoretical models to study viral evolution is the quasispecies model, as the viral quasispecies.