Debate any subject you want and I will engage you
This thread is to allow all extremes of debate to engage in any sense
I provided basic useful links I think can be improved by suggestion
Communism
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
Fascism
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
Libertarianism
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
mnei.nl
twitter.com
Shameless Self Bump
If one wants to add a potential debate on Zionism that is fine
retards should be put down like rabid dogs at birth
no 'consent' from the parent, if the child is unfit to live it is killed for the better of others
its not worth the strain on society to keep them alive
>Retard defined as
>How can this retard never be used for the better for others
>Can this undefined retard never be used for benefit
>youtube.com
I want to debate Eric Voegelin, eliminate all ideologies in the world, no more -isms of any kind, a government based on solutions and the logos, as it is written in The Word, no more acceptance for anyone taking a philosophical position a priori, that needs to adapt itself in regards to other people so they can feel "ok" about themselves for "belonging to an ideology".
Logos*
There is no god
How do you feel about that other brazilian that keeps shilling about the gnostic Christ ??
that colossal wreck
Alright I will watch your the whole video and debate it in time
But for quick response
>You mean Logos as in Christ the Word of God correct
>Rejection of a priori taking any adjustments to a posterior
Look upon his works ye mighty and despair
Might is always right
For all those curious, I will debate you
But right now Im just clarifying terms
I don't know, I'm only responsible for myself, honestly speaking, a college student here read less than 2 books per year, and he graduates, and he gives classes, maybe even get a masters.
Current state of affairs: Hegemony from the left, not a single conservative, maybe a few individuals, which usually hold no power whatsoever.
So, If I judge in regards to what I understand people here to act, you're basically dealing with a "soccer" mentality - for instance, the guy sitting in a bar, 205 lbs, broken knee, is giving opinions about the soccer player, the goalkeeper and the arbiter.
Not sure if you know what I mean.
t. chink
Niggers need to stop eating and drinking shit before they even get to the checkout lane.
The Safeway I go to always has this problem, at least half the black people that shop there are popping open bags of takis and chugging down pineapple fanta while they're going through the store. By the time they get in line they got several empty bags and bottles lining their shopping cart, and the only way the cashier is going to know that those were products from their store is if the niggers either confess or the cashier saw them chowing down earlier. They didn't even pay for those things yet. This isn't a sit-down restaurant situation where you get to eat before you pay, you gotta buy it first before you can manhandle that shit.
Fucking niggers.
Dont make it too easy/frustrating for you
It is a conceptual truth (or, so to speak, true by definition) that God is a being than which none greater can be imagined (that is, the greatest possible being that can be imagined).
God exists as an idea in the mind.
A being that exists as an idea in the mind and in reality is, other things being equal, greater than a being that exists only as an idea in the mind.
Thus, if God exists only as an idea in the mind, then we can imagine something that is greater than God (that is, a greatest possible being that does exist).
But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God (for it is a contradiction to suppose that we can imagine a being greater than the greatest possible being that can be imagined.)
Therefore, God exists.
do you have links for and against theism and atheism?
how're those birthrates coming along? :^)
IF they both act like dogs
Treat them as such
But have the compassion for a stray unruly dog equal to those considered dogs by you
As in, Logos, the beginning, of everything that exist and will come into existence.
>Alpha and Omega
Yes, God.
>Rejection in regards to taking philosophical points of view based on ideology, any ideology whatsoever
God isn't a conceptual truth, it is a construct of society that has spiraled out of control through countless generations of a two-class hierarchy
It depends, would the links be to solve an external or internal argument?
AR15 > AKs
What is the best food for my cat?
pic
Unfortunately for your class struggle theory, God has transcended class
But you resort to class struggle without objection to the original point, which amounts to a concession
I confess I am too ignorant to understant that internal/external distinction
...
i just want to have kids with mental and physical disabilities killed at birth, forcibly, by the state
Aks in a warzone win
Because Ar 15s cannot be logically found in most likely warzones, with surplus ammunition, and remain durable
The places with reliable AR 15 supply are not war zones, just places with good market
This is a good answer
But cats can be weird about somethings so whatever makes them happy for the right price
I imagine for cost and gene purity?
Would the arguments be to resolve an internal dispute within yourself or to resolve the external dispute with others
No, We're not talking about which one is more abundant, we're talking which one is a superior rifle. If you want to argue semantics on the > symbol, then fine, you win that point. AR15 is a superior firearm to an AK.
I would like both but If you only have the time for one then the external dispute
It is superior on the skilled individual, but 9/10 times a person handed an AK will do better than with an AR
The difference is made up in skill that is difficult to quantify
>debate
Sorry, but Sup Forums is a purely NatSoc board.
Kindly fuck off back to r/T_D, newfag
...
>when
>A.
>FUCKING.
>LEAF.
>says literally anything whatsoever
>we can't imagine something greater than God so God exists.
You blew your chance there Op.
Anyway debate me Fagit.
100% schrodingers cat is alive.
Do you always debate by pulling numbers like 9/10 out of your ass?
National socialism is the best sistem there is period
>libertarianism
Kek sorry m8 but that is a bad meme for severly autistic people.
For the existence
There is
>Descarte
>Resolves internal and external
>Ontological
>Look up Anselm for more
>Arguments from testimony (bible)
>Aristotle, Aquianas, Plato
(Prime or first mover and forms requires a lot of reading)
Against
These all exist as a response to the above and more
The impact is in a lot of self discovery in a soul you may or may not believe in
A lot of arguments will appeal to ignorance or emotion ignore them
Welp faggot Anselm is 100% bait
You want the cat the argument?
> 9/10 times a person handed an AK will do better than with an AR
Why? ARs have less recoil, Are generally lighter, and are always more precise than AKs.
>Pick up a gun with no training and never haven shotten a gun
>Which do you use better
>AR or AK
People know you're from t_d when you call a leaf out and they're not even leafposting.
Which one shoots more bullets faster and is more durable? It may hurt your soul, but with plebs these questions win the game
Nat Soc not even to understand unprovoked expansion of power
Hitler would hang you
AR is both faster and more durable.
As in higher fire rate?
>Aristotle + Aquianas
What are the best argumetns for and against Aquinas, Im guessing the Suma for them but not sure what the text against it would be.
Do you believe in A God and or a particular religion?
Well Kant would be the best argument against
Not because of direct refutation, but because he takes all of Aquinas and Aristotle and offers secular reasoning for it. He essential subsumes their ideas, which depending on evaluation makes them lesser. Basically Aquinas collapses into Kant depending on view
Im a Christian
Yes. AKs hover around 600 rpm where as ARs hover around 800 rpm. Generally ARs have a faster cyclic rate.
Because Suma Theo does not offer many arguments against, because it can be dismissed at day one by dismissing Christianity.
Aristotle offers a lot, but in regards to theism he becomes mostly irrelevant
And would the average person get this 800 rpm without experience?
>Im a Christian
What authors/books/experience led you to affirming the existence of God(s) and that Christianity was true and that a specifici denomonination was the correct one
Assuming the average person can pull their finger back half an inch and keep it there, they'd have no problem reaching the maximum rate of fire on either platform.
>anyone who uses lol is a shill
it is faster to type, monkey.
That's not what the image says.
Explain to me why you think it makes sense to validate a faith based concept with anything other than faith (ie reason). If reason is enough for faith, faith is unnecessary. If reason is not enough, then why would you argue with any reason at all?
Declaring war on Nazi Germany was a mistake. Before declaration, Germans only invaded lands that were once German. Their reunification was mostly bloodless, and 60 million died in what amounted to a war that only strengthened forces of true evil.
>Faith x Reason
>Concept based on Faith
This is human language, "buzzwords", you mean if one exist the other isn't present?
We reach Truth contained in the whole of everything that is and will ever be
>ie "God says Be; and it is"
You can argue as much as you want, but you're already dealing with the denial within your question proclaiming "Faith" is unreasonable, vice-versa.
This is simply playing with words, trying to win an argument, you can win an argument without being right, yet that doesn't disprove God.
Something which you can't fathom, incapable of such since we have all fallen under the Original Sin.
You live within the Logos, it's literally every single possibility; already tried to be denied, "deconstructed", so much so that it needed a new brand "undeconstructible", by pure semantics and intellectual dishonesty.
If you claim to "understand God" you're already commiting a sin by reducing it to Human Intellect, if you claim to "have seen God", again diminishing it to a perception.
Reason why I said what you asked is simply empty words, "prove a denial", when it's the one denying the one who needs to prove.
>mnei.nl
Here, avoid 2400+ of human existence in Bibliography, you'll win arguments.
Or study Philosophy and reach the Status quaestionis, by the end of it you'll testify the Truth Christianity is at the moment, the "Enigma of the Light" or Christian mystical practices, whatever you want to name it.
Not perception, Human senses*
Sorry for lacking words, my main language is not English.
In Portuguese I would explain as: Percepções Sensíveis; which in English would be Sensible Perceptions, I don't think it sounds correct.