View Poll Results: Do sources truly matter when forum debating?

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    41 80.39%
  • No

    10 19.61%
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 121 to 130 of 130

Thread: Does posting sources while debating matter?

  1. #121
    Dungeon Master
    Veni, vidi, dormivi!

    spud_meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Didjabringabeeralong
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    33,868
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    I'm pretty sure cites don't matter that much, as evidenced in that gun debate thread; it was an experiment directly related to this issue.

    From now on I'm not using cites, unless I have to prove an event did indeed happen. I'm returning to my general philosophical discussion.
    Hey Wakey, did anyone the stuff you cited?
    So follow me into the desert
    As desperate as you are
    Where the moon is glued to a picture of heaven
    And all the little pigs have God

  2. #122
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Sometimes sources matter, sometimes they don't.

    I find in general that there is an increasing trend toward outright ignoring expertise of professionals because there is a growing sentiment against science and academia, for some reason. In many cases, you can quote a million experts but it won't make a difference to someone. Climate change is one example of this problem.

    Sources matter to me because they come from people who have dedicated their lives to the subject, as opposed to people who transiently debate a subject for 20 minutes and then move on with their lives. They also help to bring in an outsider perspective if two people are deadlocked.

    However, I mainly only trust peer reviewed sources, or official sources that confirm what happened in a story. There is a lot of bias out there and blatant lying. You have to be careful.

  3. #123
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Temporal View Post
    Sometimes sources matter, sometimes they don't.

    I find in general that there is an increasing trend toward outright ignoring expertise of professionals because there is a growing sentiment against science and academia, for some reason. In many cases, you can quote a million experts but it won't make a difference to someone. Climate change is one example of this problem.

    Sources matter to me because they come from people who have dedicated their lives to the subject, as opposed to people who transiently debate a subject for 20 minutes and then move on with their lives. They also help to bring in an outsider perspective if two people are deadlocked.

    However, I mainly only trust peer reviewed sources, or official sources that confirm what happened in a story. There is a lot of bias out there and blatant lying. You have to be careful.
    I agree on the climate change topic, too. People who have subscribed to the global warming religion fanatically adhere to it despite the world of direct counter evidence like Young-Earth Creationists do to their religious beliefs. There is no convincing these people through fact that global warming is a non-issue because their religious beliefs are not based on facts to begin with.

  4. #124
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    If we're just sitting around having a light-handed discussion, I wouldn't expect sources. However, the moment you cross your arms, stomp your foot and demand one of me, expect to have to source your every syllable from that point forward.

  5. #125
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    I'm going to post a third thread on this issue. I don't believe cites are that useful, and "Guns are Good" experiment showed it. However, now I'm told certain cites are worth more than others. I want to know which sources are the most credible. I'm also told Mr. Valentine's sources in his argument didn't matter.

    I do believe his argument was good.

    Now I want to know what qualifies as "so credible that it cannot be denied". IF I'm going to use cites that are credible, I want them to be credible enough so as not to be blown off and utterly disregarded. Once I create my own argument with credible resources, I don't want it to be for nothing.

  6. #126
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I agree on the climate change topic, too. People who have subscribed to the global warming religion fanatically adhere to it despite the world of direct counter evidence like Young-Earth Creationists do to their religious beliefs. There is no convincing these people through fact that global warming is a non-issue because their religious beliefs are not based on facts to begin with.
    I think the reverse is true, but I note your insistence on having to have factual sources in another thread, but want to go against the facts, against the overwhelming majority, regardless of the facts on this issue. And yet, you claim those who have the facts, the overwhelming support of the scientific community are theones treating it like a relgion. Do you not see the contradiction? The problem with debates on a site like this?

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  7. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I think the reverse is true....
    That's all you ever need to post. That sums up everything you have to say.

  8. #128
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    That's all you ever need to post. That sums up everything you have to say.
    It is important to think. I recomend it if you're up to it. But you should read further in that post and try to answer the point, if you can I mean.



    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #129
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Temporal View Post
    I find in general that there is an increasing trend toward outright ignoring expertise of professionals because there is a growing sentiment against science and academia, for some reason. In many cases, you can quote a million experts but it won't make a difference to someone. Climate change is one example of this problem.
    There is a difference between science and generalities. That is one reason not to trust "experts". I can't stand supposed experts that say "this is the facts" when it comes to generalities. One size does not always fit all. For example the raising of kids. One "expert" will tell you that you shouldn't spank your kids when they misbehave in a way that is a danger to themselves and/or others. That you should just give them a "time out" in thier bedrooms...where all thier toys are. Others will stand by it.

    The reason that I don't trust climatologists is for the simple fact that that particular science is 1: in its infancy..only a few decades old is young compared to predicting climate change on a global scale vs the actual climate change that has been going on for millions of years that included hot and cold climates beyond what we see today. 2: predicting climate change on a global scale is so full of variables that it has got to be among the most difficult things to do on this Earth. If not impossible. It only takes one missed or unnecessarily added variable to completely change the outcome of a model. And humans are fallible. While I know climatology cannot be measured and based on a specific area I still liken it to the weather man. If he can only be right half the time then why is it that climatologists think that they are so right as to cry that the Earth is ending based on weather/temp predictions on a global scale?

    Anyways another reason to not always trust "experts" is because they are often wrong...alot. It use to be that when someone wanted to study something they wouldn't dare publish something unless they had had it peer reviewed by neutral parties first. Now things are published by supposed experts whether it has been peer reviewed or not. Its become all about fame and money now adays. The advent of the internet has only made this even more likely to happen. Its really sad.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #130
    User Subetai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Last Seen
    05-16-12 @ 03:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    As a rule, posting sources is more helpful than not. It allows for the actual origin of the claim, their workings and history of correct/incorrect statements to be checked and so allow a fuller picture of whatever is being discussed to emerge. Also, if someone is mistaken, then by pointing out the errors present in the sources they use, they can correct their knowledge. I know I've gone to post things in arguments elsewhere before and gone to look for a source, only to find I couldn't substantiate my claim and so abandon that line of argument.

    Sometimes though, if the source is of especially low credibility or contentious (or both) then it will probably not help matters much. And as pretty much anything can and will be politicized in the current Anglophone political climate, that can lead to some pretty bitter and fruitless ad hominem attacks.

    It's a judgement call. Ultimately, I think posting sources does matter, but good judgement in using sources in the first place is also necessary. Citations for citations sake are too easy, especially with the popularity of political blogging and opinion-driven media.

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •