No, philosophies is a cohortative line of education, it's part of you must challenge arguments, and have yours be challenged.

@Grenade123 For sure a lot of taxing and spending should be moved to the states

yes, and how do you need a full college class for that?

Argumentation isn't a skill that emerges naturally.

you can write a book "The fundamentals of Philosophy" and sell it for 30 bucks

Sure it is

i think all that power should be moved down. cut some the state stuff, give it to towns, replace it with power from the feds

give that to the states

Argumentation is a skill you learn by argumenting

Having debates

@Awrini Being contrary isn't the same thing as argumentation.

@Grenade123 The same job in Louisiana typically pays more in Cali, but they can still move if they like

Debates aren't argumentation.

A person who learns "The fine skill of arguing" will not suddenly become a great debater

Debates require argumentation

I'm not being contrary. True argumentation comes from gathering knowledge.

Arguing isn't argumentation.

you know what i mean

@Grenade123 The Fed imo mostly only should do international affairs, I don''t see much they should be responsible beyond that

don't strawman my poor use of my 2nd language

Yes, and it's not what I'm talking about.

agreed

I'm not.

You are, you know what i mean and deliberately put me in a bad light for using wrong words by pointing them out

When you are arguementative, yiu are also expected to be able to reinforce your arguements with facts.

No, I'm not. You are talking about taking separate position, and arguing over which is correct.

That is not argumentation.

That is an argument, or a debate.

Argumentation requires practice, just like any other skill

commieforina wants to be ultra socialist? fine.... don't use my fucking money from way the fuck over here to do it when i want to help this poor person right down the street from me.

Yes, but the skill you're promoting is not argumentation.

what is it then?

It's debate.

@Grenade123 exactly, then they can fail and be an example

debate requires argumentation

No it doesn't debate is not argumentation.

more over, then the rest of the states will be able to offer help

i said no such thing

rather than everyone drowning

i said it REQUIRES it

Not really.

You can't have a debate without argumentation

It requires an argument, not argumentation.

a debate without argumentation is the Leftist tactic of just shouting over another person

Dennafen

@Grenade123 And if you don't like your government, instead of having 0 real options because the EU and Canada are nuts, you can move states

exactly

although soon there will be no EU at this rate

so maybe there will be options again

@Grenade123 Course you have to be careful about too much polarization

Debates are adversarial by design, you don't care about the other persons points, your interlocutor is the enemy and the audience is the target.

Arguementation is the systematic reasoning that you use to support your arguements

No.

It's not @Awrini

So a debate without arguementation is just bullshit

what is argumentation then?

Yes it is. It's the literal definition

hold on

@Dennafen what do you define as argumentation?

argumentation is good

fighting is what you are confusing it as

I stop looking at general for five minutes and you guys debate up a 100+ message storm ⛈

Argumentation is the promotion of discovery of truth though discussion. You don't go into it with pre conceived idea of what is right or wrong.

a debate doesn't have to be adversarial

In a debate, you just have 2 opposing stances

And the goal is to try and persuade others to agree with your viewpoint/arguments, so either your opponent, or your audience

Yes @Dr.Wol Debate is adversarial.

what definition did you pull that from?

seriously, what?

because everyone else was using the "the act or process of forming reasons and of drawing conclusions and applying them to a case in discussion" definition

Man i wish we had a debate channel ...for liek debates ....

Lmao 😂

we do, but that channel is in permanent "slow" mode

so you can't talk fast

Oh i didnt even know that

forget something? gotta wait 10 seconds and forget it agian

Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning, 2nd Edition David Zarefsky

and JDM won't take it off slow mo

Is where I got it.

"Argumentation theory, or argumentation, is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be reached through logical reasoning; that is, claims based, soundly or not, on premises."

" It includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and persuasion. It studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in both artificial and real world settings"

sound about right?

or did he use a very different definition that he made up for his book

so... how is that not debating?

At the end of a debate, people draw their own conclusions and either agree or disagree

i guess there is a chicken and the egg problem where

Close enough.

debate requires argumentation, but argumentation includes debate

I just use Merriam webster when i googled the word

"the act or process of forming reasons and of drawing conclusions and applying them to a case in discussion"

Okay, it's not adversarial. Debate is.

argumentation doesn't have to be a debate,

You can make your argument without having a counter-argument given,

By preaching for example

Debate requires it, but it is not debate, sound fair?

Argumentation has an interlocutor, but it's not a debate.

Debate requires arguments to be presented, but it's not argumentation.

presenting arguments is argumentation

No.

I just use Merriam webster when i googled the word

"the act or process of forming reasons and of drawing conclusions and applying them to a case in discussion"

I like how people try to redefine words.

I'm not redefining a word.

I'm using the original definition.

the action or process of reasoning systematically in support of an idea, action, or theory. ?

that is debatable

lol

damn you got me there,

I didn't get to talk to the guy who invented the word 😦

you'd have to prove that was the first ever use of the term

i have to go with a dictionary definition

which, technically, it isn't even the first use, give that its the second edition

but it most likely didn't change much

you guys arguing over semantics?

yes

Actually, no.

we're debating!

.... there is irony here

😛

its semantics ultimately, but thats 90% of internet debate

<:NFA:354470494747230208>

that's because people's arguments suck without redefining words.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DkF_u4XW4AI5liK.jpg

zionism debunked!

"In ordinary discourse, the word “argue” often means “to disagree” (usually it carries the implication that someone does so insistently or aggressively). In argumentation theory, argument in the sense of disagreement is often called “argument-2” (see Goodwin 2001). Like other logics, informal logic focuses on arguing in a narrower sense, understanding an argument as an attempt to provide evidence in favour of some point of view. This can usefully be called an evidentiary account of argument. It makes arguing an intentional act (a speech or communication act) which is usually embedded in argument in the broader sense, functioning as an attempt to resolve the disagreement this implies."

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-informal/#Arg

A rose by any other name...

So yes, we ARE redefining words
Got it.

Okay, if you want to say that, go for it.

that...

It's still a skill you need to learn, not something you can just read in a book.

"Argumentation is the promotion of discovery of truth though discussion. You don't go into it with pre conceived idea of what is right or wrong."

Tell me, how does one discover truth with argumentation if you cannot have the pre conceived idea of right or wrong? truth is not a form of right? what is the term "right or wrong" mean here, a preconceived notion of the truth, or of a moral right or wrong." If you believe you discovered truth through previous argumentation, but ascertain the notion you may be wrong, and proceed to enter a debate to test how this theory holds up, is that not argumentation?

the skill of persuasion? not sure I'd buy a car from you though.

Okay for example, "Should we punch nazis" I'm of the opinion that we should not punch nazis.

depends on the goal

That violence is a poor means of debate.

that would be a moral claim

Let me finish.

So while I'm of that opinion if I were to argue that point with you, I would have to be willing to be convinced other wise.

I, on the other hand, am all for punching Nazis. But hey, good luck actually finding one.

lol

And we together would be trying to seek what IS right not what we already believe to be right.

correct me if i am wrong, but wouldn't whether or not any given debate is or is not a form of argumentation depend on the intention of the people in a debate?

https://youtu.be/1joIBFzCjFk

Debate is not argumentation it is, by definition antagonistic.

When you go into a debate, you're going into win the debate.

are you?

Yes.

context matters fellas. If you are trying to WIN, you don't need an open mind, you just need your talking points. If you are trying to actually communicate with eachother....on the other hand.

i don't always enter a debate to be right

Then it's not a debate.

sometimes i enter it to prove the flaws in someones logic

That's not a debate.

but it has two sides

Okay, it's not a debate.

that are opposing one another

you guys can debate this if you want, but I don't feel like arguing.

Okay, that's not what a debate is, a debate are two opposed side trying to convince a third party.

Ok, so what is the Dennafenian definition of debate?

I just said it.

wrote it.

an antagonistic discussion between 2 sides?

A competition between two sides.

It's the act of convincing a third party.

What?

So I don't have to believe what I'm debating I just have to convince an audience that I'm right.

feel like im in an ancap server again

Have you ever done debate?

Like the debate team?

i have done debates yes

but not all things i would call debates meet your criteria

some did

What?

So you didn't do debate team.

you had debates?

words have multiple meanings. Do you not understand context?

no, but if being on debate team is the only way to have a debate, then i guess i've never been in one

but i've been in plenty of open debates, with an audience, in public chats

with 2 researched sides

I don't really know what you're trying to get at here we're agreeing now.

Lads

You seen this ?

https://kotaku.com/inside-the-culture-of-sexism-at-riot-games-1828165483

omg

@zutt i saw it , was too long so i didnt read it

its kotaku

well just from the text there it appears there was someone named lacy that was a sexist.

yes and no

Thats why i asked a question yesterday about the dudes that founded riot why should they choose to hire women in positions of leadership

Its thier company not the governments

her intent was sexist, but so would passing someone up who met qualifications just because they were female.

what happened: someone didn't like the work place environment, so they left, and are screaming sexism

to gain moral high-ground

I wouldnt put a women in a leadership position just because she was a women she’d have to have the qualifications in order for me to have her in that position

rather than start a competing business, and try to steal all their works and their market share.

This ^

You dont like it , then go start your own business

well you would fail to meet proper "diversity" standards.

Diversity is code for racism against whites

Its bullshit

"She said her direct manager would ask her if it was hard working at Riot being so cute. Sometimes, she said, he’d imply that her position was a direct result of her appearance."

^ this would be a legit reason to claim sexism but then again also make you question your actual ability.

and men and any other identity you want it to be.

also, would fit the definition of diversity hire

Those sources said that talented women have fallen through Riot’s hiring processes because they weren’t considered “core gamers,” which one source described as “an excuse.”

You hire the best candidate not the least common skin color

😂

@zutt lmao

A game company ...lmao not a core gamer who would have thought

Doesnt sound sexist to me

depends on why they think they are not a gamer

That article is kind of all over the place

the person could just not play games... or could be they are stuck in the 80's where "women don't play games"

“Talented woman”

or they just suck at gaming!

Preferencing Riot’s definition of “core” gamers during hiring means drawing in employees from a larger pool of men than women. Avid players of MOBAs (multiplayer online battle arenas, a genre encompassing popular games including League of Legends and Dota 2) and first-person shooter fans are typically men.

Talented women wanting to get hired so the can get the #metoo dollars 💵

Lel

this article is filled with 50/50 statements that could be examples of sexism.... but also could just be women just happened to not fit.

vaugeness 😉 the best weapon of SJW's arsenal

so you can change your debate stance to wherever suits you

thought bullshit was their best weapon? or are they the same thing?

Im for women getting hired but playing the “let me blame something other than me “ why i cant move up

Id fucking hire an attractive women over a man with the same qualifications for a marketing job because dat bitch could market shit which = 💰

Lmao

Another woman, who was interviewing for a position far removed from games or game development, said she felt like she wasn’t being taken seriously because, instead of playing League of Legends, she casually played World of Warcraft.

👌

....

@zutt she was a filthy casual

Disgusting

like "She said her direct manager would ask her if it was hard working at Riot being so cute" that is a legit potential HR incident that i wouldn't care about because i would think that guy is an asshole. even if it was me being told something similar by a female manager i would be like "excuse me? what bs is that?"

"After an idea she really believed in fell flat during a meeting, she asked a male colleague to present the same idea to the same group of people days later. He was skeptical, but she insisted that he give it a shot. “Lo and behold, the week after that, [he] went in, presented exactly as I did and the whole room was like, ‘Oh my gosh, this is amazing.’ "

that would be a legit reason to question things... unless that "colleague" was slightly hire up the food chain then its bs again

probably an accurate picture of her

beard and all

atleast they're not console peasants

The woman who was asked about her World of Warcraft gear said she felt like an interviewee’s record wasn’t as valued as their ability to fit into Riot’s culture. Even outside of the apparent emphasis on being a “core gamer,” she questioned what interviewers meant when they talked about “culture fit.”

Kek

I never knew riot was this much based

Have more respect for them now

they're a riot

booo

off the stage

the solution here is: tell people to not work at riot, find a better game studio, or make your own

Knock Knock,

Who's there?

Fak,

Fak who?

Fakkaf you filthy casual!

its that simple

tbh, most game dev places SUCK to work at

As a self identifying Windup duck, I've oftened wondered why people don't just randomly give me money when they are passing near me. Now, I must assume they are WindupDuckAphobic.

not even valve, apparently, is that great either

if recent news is to be believed

tbh, I feel like most stories are exaggerated,

The average person is not that smart 😛

actually so true it's painful.

what she probably experienced was more nepotism that anything

yes

which is like "welcome to the real world"

my perception of "Professionalism" got ruined during my internship,

Where i could get away working for about 1-2 hours per day, still met demand

And could convince my direct superiors I was working long hours cuz they didn't understand code

that

and that most companies seem to have a vague feel of "one thing fucks up, its all over"

ye

but as for Nepotism

"Friends helping out friends"