{"id":1674,"date":"2012-01-31T11:21:25","date_gmt":"2012-01-31T16:21:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/?p=1674"},"modified":"2012-12-03T17:05:07","modified_gmt":"2012-12-03T22:05:07","slug":"two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html","title":{"rendered":"Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves"},"content":{"rendered":"<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC \"-\/\/W3C\/\/DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional\/\/EN\" \"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/TR\/REC-html40\/loose.dtd\">\n<html><head><meta http-equiv=\"content-type\" content=\"text\/html; charset=utf-8\"><meta http-equiv=\"content-type\" content=\"text\/html; charset=utf-8\"><\/head><body><p style=\"text-align: center;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/84\/2012\/01\/cagematch.jpg\" class=\" decorated-link\" target=\"_blank\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-large wp-image-1676\" title=\"cagematch\" src=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/84\/2012\/01\/cagematch-1024x680.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"448\" height=\"298\"><\/a><\/p>\n<p>After I outlined my <a href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/intelligently-designing-a-debate-on-religion.html\" class=\" decorated-link\" target=\"_blank\">best practises for debating religion<\/a>, <a href=\"http:\/\/eve-tushnet.blogspot.com\/\" class=\" decorated-link\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\">Eve Tushnet<\/a> and <a href=\"http:\/\/prodigalnomore.wordpress.com\/\" class=\" decorated-link\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\">The Ubiquitous<\/a> had some thought-provoking criticisms to make. Well, The Ubiquitous\u2019s was framed as a compliment, but it worried me more. He said, in praise of my suggestion that debates open with both sides putting their epistemological cards on the table:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>I suspect that the only debate worth having right now regards the problem of induction, which basically summarizes just about every objection to just about everything with supposed theistic overtones.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>If every debate I participated in ended up being a philosophically rigorous discussion of the problem of induction, I\u2019d get out of the business and finally start that band that only sings about grammar that I\u2019ve been meaning to for years. \u00a0It\u2019s hard-to-impossible to\u00a0come up with foolproof criteria for choosing between systems of first principles, so I\u2019m very suspicious of Ubiquitous\u2019s enthusiasm.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/lesswrong.com\/lw\/5kz\/the_5second_level\/\" class=\" decorated-link\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\">Going more abstract can distract you<\/a> from the problem at hand. \u00a0You can get to the rarefied point where your philosophy becomes totally unmoored from the world we live in, and any attempt to appeal to experience is denounces as foolish consequentialism. \u00a0(I promise an example of this tomorrow). \u00a0So I\u00a0have a lot of sympathy with Eve\u2019s criticism that:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>I\u2019ve learned a lot more, and been more deeply persuaded by, speeches which roved freely (or careened drunkenly!) from topic to topic, or which centered on a single image rather than a single topic, or which attempted to change the questions of the debate rather than answering the questions their opponents cared about\u2026<\/p>\n<p>Plus I worry that listing the kinds of evidence you approve and accept in advance makes it harder to be startled by something striking which falls outside those boundaries. My impression, which could be wrong or overly cynical, is that the more people focus on epistemological questions in this kind of debate, the less likely they are to actually change their minds about anything\u2013because you can always find more reasons! Or add epicycles, or whatever.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>So here\u2019s my compromise\/resynthesis: I still think it\u2019s important to start a debate with epistemology and standards of evidence. \u00a0It gives your opponent a chance to know what attacks might work on you and which require more heavy lifting. \u00a0It also saves you time setting these expectations in the beginning instead of circling back to them constantly during the meat of the speeches. \u00a0But the rest of the discussion shouldn\u2019t all be at this level of abstraction.<\/p>\n<p>The virtue of an epistemology doesn\u2019t lie only in it\u2019s consistency and philosophical rigor. \u00a0If it did, the\u00a0solipsists, in their <a href=\"http:\/\/books.google.com\/books?id=p7UEAQAAIAAJ&amp;dq=orthodoxy&amp;pg=PA33#v=onepage&amp;q=small%20circle&amp;f=false\" class=\" decorated-link\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\">small circles<\/a>, would be sweeping all the showdowns. \u00a0We also judge an epistemology by what it can <em>do<\/em>, and that requires that we link it back up with our experiences.<\/p>\n<p>Essentially, the debaters have the first epistemological round to identify the system they\u2019ll be defending and head off misconceptions at the get go. \u00a0For the rest of the rounds, no matter what the topic, the goal is to persuade the audience that your system is beautiful\/useful\/strange enough to unsettle them enough to keep investigating it after the debate.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>After I outlined my best practises for debating religion, Eve Tushnet and The Ubiquitous had some thought-provoking criticisms to make. Well, The Ubiquitous\u2019s was framed as a compliment, but it worried me more. He said, in praise of my suggestion that debates open with both sides putting their epistemological cards on the table: I suspect [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":127,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,68],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1674","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-debatetactics","category-epistemologyphilosophy"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v21.1 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"After I outlined my best practises for debating religion, Eve Tushnet and The Ubiquitous had some thought-provoking criticisms to make. Well, The\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"After I outlined my best practises for debating religion, Eve Tushnet and The Ubiquitous had some thought-provoking criticisms to make. Well, The\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Unequally Yoked\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2012-01-31T16:21:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2012-12-03T22:05:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"http:\/\/wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/files\/2012\/01\/cagematch-1024x680.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Leah Libresco\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Leah Libresco\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html\",\"name\":\"Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2012-01-31T16:21:25+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2012-12-03T22:05:07+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#\/schema\/person\/17ee17592b35b40040d5f5f7ea5ab464\"},\"description\":\"After I outlined my best practises for debating religion, Eve Tushnet and The Ubiquitous had some thought-provoking criticisms to make. Well, The\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/\",\"name\":\"Unequally Yoked\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#\/schema\/person\/17ee17592b35b40040d5f5f7ea5ab464\",\"name\":\"Leah Libresco\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/20e1e6a3a94c4e7928687804a41d888d?s=96&d=mm&r=r\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/20e1e6a3a94c4e7928687804a41d888d?s=96&d=mm&r=r\",\"caption\":\"Leah Libresco\"},\"description\":\"Leah is the author of Arriving at Amen and Building the Benedict Option. Her further writing can be found at leahlibresco.com.\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/author\/leahlibresco\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves","description":"After I outlined my best practises for debating religion, Eve Tushnet and The Ubiquitous had some thought-provoking criticisms to make. Well, The","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves","og_description":"After I outlined my best practises for debating religion, Eve Tushnet and The Ubiquitous had some thought-provoking criticisms to make. Well, The","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html","og_site_name":"Unequally Yoked","article_published_time":"2012-01-31T16:21:25+00:00","article_modified_time":"2012-12-03T22:05:07+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"http:\/\/wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/files\/2012\/01\/cagematch-1024x680.jpg"}],"author":"Leah Libresco","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Leah Libresco","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html","name":"Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#website"},"datePublished":"2012-01-31T16:21:25+00:00","dateModified":"2012-12-03T22:05:07+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#\/schema\/person\/17ee17592b35b40040d5f5f7ea5ab464"},"description":"After I outlined my best practises for debating religion, Eve Tushnet and The Ubiquitous had some thought-provoking criticisms to make. Well, The","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/2012\/01\/two-debaters-enter-one-epistemology-leaves.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Two Debaters Enter, One Epistemology Leaves"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/","name":"Unequally Yoked","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#\/schema\/person\/17ee17592b35b40040d5f5f7ea5ab464","name":"Leah Libresco","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/20e1e6a3a94c4e7928687804a41d888d?s=96&d=mm&r=r","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/20e1e6a3a94c4e7928687804a41d888d?s=96&d=mm&r=r","caption":"Leah Libresco"},"description":"Leah is the author of Arriving at Amen and Building the Benedict Option. Her further writing can be found at leahlibresco.com.","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/author\/leahlibresco"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1674","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/127"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1674"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1674\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1674"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1674"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/unequallyyoked\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1674"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}