A Tool of Debate

[Remiel]

A few posts from another thread just got me thinking back to something I did back in my high school law class, which I thought would make for a relevant inquiry.

Do you ever try to argue the opposite point of view from your own? Such exercises have likely been common since ancient Greece and even longer ago, yet does the idea come up much in everyday life?

I recall I was forced to make an argument for some legal point related to sexual abuse of minors, something I really did not want to even think about, let alone debate. Feeling rather annoyed, I commented that one of my classmates, a vegan, should have to debate in favour of eating meat, which he immediately dismissed as stupid for the aforementioned fact. It reminds me that sometimes there can be something to be learned in trying to see through anothers eyes, something to be kept in mind given the polarizing nature of politics.

Don't expect me to start arguing for the dissolution of Canada, starting tomorrow. It's not going to happen. Perhaps I'll never try it here, I admit. I'm not exactly the most inspiring of posters in that respect. But who knows. I think, at least, there is something for us all to learn in looking at the issue from both sides, even if you're just fishing for better ammo, .

[mikedavid00]

A few posts from another thread just got me thinking back to something I did back in my high school law class, which I thought would make for a relevant inquiry.

On all my arguments I look at the other side and argue myself. For instance, I hate Chretien and Martin. However, there are very solid arguments to suggest that they did less to ruin the country than Mulrouny and I would have to agree with that notion. My emotions run higher for Martin and Chritien, but Mulrouney really did ruin our Country.

There is a logical argument for a minority of poeple, to dictate the rights to another minority, meanwhile, the majority has absolutely no say. I understand that.

There is a valid argument for why you should take away drivers licenses from law abiding teenagers that act within their right to drop out of school. Yes i know. it takes a villiage to raise a child.

People like Saturn and Geoffery are not able, or maybe not at the maturity level to be able to do this. Thus, they have extremely contradictory, flawed arguments which are not backed by numbers or fact.

I on the other hand, have backed all my arguments with logical fact, proof, and numbers. Not emotion and idealism.

"Learning to work with the 'establishment' is a sign of maturity". - that's the truth.

[geoffrey]

People like Saturn and Geoffery are not able, or maybe not at the maturity level to be able to do this. Thus, they have extremely contradictory, flawed arguments which are not backed by numbers or fact.

I've yet to see any evidence in factual statistics that shows that all immigrants just abuse us and we need to close the borders and depot non-Canadian born citizens. But hey, who needs proof when you've got clever rhetoric and gigantic font sizes.

I'd personally say that while I may disagree with Mr. Saturn quite a bit, he's one of the few new posters here that actually brings information and evidence to an argument.

You just sound most days like Dave Rutherford who thinks he's got all the facts because he's heard a few anecdotal cases that somehow represent everything.

--

Back to the real topic before mike resorted to his typical debate tactic called character assasination...

I consistantly argue from the other side here, sometimes it adds balance. I normally make it pretty clear when I'm doing so though.

[mikedavid00]

I've yet to see any evidence in factual statistics that shows that all immigrants just abuse us and we need to close the borders and depot non-Canadian born citizens. But hey, who needs proof when you've got clever rhetoric and gigantic font sizes.

I never said they all abuse us or that they all use services. I've known some that have gotten lucky and have litterly landed here and took a mid-pay job from a Canadian (fact).

I also never said that we should deport all non-Canadian born citizens, we should only deport those who are undesireables like Arar and his family and his friends.

You just sound most days like Dave Rutherford who thinks he's got all the facts because he's heard a few anecdotal cases that somehow represent everything.

Laughable. I don't think I've ever seen Saturn give numbers or eveidence towards anything. I've whitnessed a lot of his idealism though.

I consistantly argue from the other side here, sometimes it adds balance. I normally make it pretty clear when I'm doing so though.

Funny, I have yet to see that.

I get challenged on things, I bring back the numbers and research, then no one wants to answer face the truth. Melanie didn't believe that the good majority of people who refuge from Somalia are on welfare. I posted cites and numbers from reasearch papers and articles proving myself right.

I go though all this time and research and here no argument back or no rebuttle.

Why?

Becuae I have an IQ of 136 and I'm never wrong?

Possibly.

[geoffrey]

Becuae I have an IQ of 136 and I'm never wrong?

Possibly.

That's not that impressive, I out do you by 20 points.

But oh well, what's a number anyways.

It's dangerous to think your never wrong... the most brilliant minds are the most likely to re-examine their thinking. Single-track, always right types generally tend to be the guy in flannel at the bar spouting off about those darned brown people next door.

EDIT: And by the way Mr. Brainchild, I don't know where you were educated at, but in the rest of the world, random writting in funky fonts don't represet a valid source. You have no reliable source listed for your Somali quotes beyond "I'm never wrong."

[blueblood]

Becuae I have an IQ of 136 and I'm never wrong?

Possibly.

That's not that impressive, I out do you by 20 points.

But oh well, what's a number anyways.

It's dangerous to think your never wrong... the most brilliant minds are the most likely to re-examine their thinking. Single-track, always right types generally tend to be the guy in flannel at the bar spouting off about those darned brown people next door.

EDIT: And by the way Mr. Brainchild, I don't know where you were educated at, but in the rest of the world, random writting in funky fonts don't represet a valid source. You have no reliable source listed for your Somali quotes beyond "I'm never wrong."

136 is pretty good, 156 is impressive, that is genius. 130-144 is gifted though, i'm only 130, average is around 100. Should start sending people to IQ test.com, hahahaha. Geoffrey's right on this one. I heard the people debate the best is when they are arguing a point on which they don't agree with as they tend to get "blinded" on topics that they feel passionate about

[madmax]

A few posts from another thread just got me thinking back to something I did back in my high school law class, which I thought would make for a relevant inquiry.

People like Saturn and Geoffery are not able, or maybe not at the maturity level to be able to do this.

I on the other hand, have backed all my arguments with logical fact, ....

"Learning to work with the 'establishment' is a sign of maturity". - that's the truth.

.......And Personal Attacks.

[margrace]

I never understood the significance of IQ tests, I scored 150 but I never figured I was as smart as the majority of people. I am not a good vocal debater and I tend to shoot from the hip when I do post on here.

On the other hand I guess I did pass it on to my children because they could easily score in the 90's on exams especially when it was something they were interested in.

Knowing myself I have tended to put little credance in these tests. I have never been able to master proper spelling or understood basic english grammar.

One thing that does fascinate me is what I consider common sense. For instance right from the first it was very apparent to me that the US was just repeating Vietnam in Iraq. I never could understand why anyone could not see that.

[watching&waiting]

This whole garbage about IQ tests is not only very wrong but it also is very misleading. In school back in my time we had to take IQ tests at grade 4, 7 and 10. I remember that I was rated very high in garde 4 and above averge in grade 7, in grade ten I blew off the test because the one thing I learned was the higher you scored the more they expected of you and the way that you were marked, so I scored average on the grade 10 test, but my marks after that were always in the 90's and I put less effort into it ehn before.

Later in college I was one of the few that passed the tests during the terms and so when it was announced that anyone that was satisfied with their marks so far could leave it so and not write the finals. We had less then 10% of the class with passing marks back then. So I did not bother with the finals, but those that did said the finals were really easy and most of the class passed them. So did this mean that they were now smarter? Or did it mean that the college now had to use standarize tests and there were much easier then what the teachers were trying to bring the students up to during the term?

The one thing I did learn real quickly in the real world and that was if you wanted a job done right and proper methods used, you hired a college student. If you wanted a person who would know the theory and very little practical knowledge you hired a University graduate. Tjhings may be different today, but in the biochemistry field this was the case. The most dangerous personn I ever had in a lab was one that had a masters degree. He just never could remeber the order of mixing acid and water or any other such thing. I watched him handle radioactive samples with his hands and many other things. After a year of trying we just had to let him go. But he was a very knowledgible person when you talke about about theory and design of things.

An IQ is not something that says you know things but rather you have the ability to learn. You will never learn if all you do is tell people how bright you are, but rather ypu will usually make them respect you less as they will just wait and see what pearls oof wisdom you have to give them. When it is not forth coming you will find they just write you off as a waste of time and effort.

[leonardcohen]

I heard the people debate the best is when they are arguing a point on which they don't agree with as they tend to get "blinded" on topics that they feel passionate about

You're right on that point,sometimes when i see something that really gets my goat i rush in with righteous indignation and fire away with all guns blazing and logic gets lost somewhere,somehow.It's best to back away and come back later when your blood pressure has come back down and you can back up your argument.

[geoffrey]

An IQ is not something that says you know things but rather you have the ability to learn. You will never learn if all you do is tell people how bright you are, but rather ypu will usually make them respect you less as they will just wait and see what pearls oof wisdom you have to give them. When it is not forth coming you will find they just write you off as a waste of time and effort.

That's exactly right.

[Saturn]

People like Saturn and Geoffery are not able, or maybe not at the maturity level to be able to do this. Thus, they have extremely contradictory, flawed arguments which are not backed by numbers or fact.

I on the other hand, have backed all my arguments with logical fact, proof, and numbers. Not emotion and idealism.

"Learning to work with the 'establishment' is a sign of maturity". - that's the truth.

Strange of you to say. I find you to be particularly emotional, your proofs are anecdotes, and your numbers don't add up. Geoffrey may be younger than you are but I find him far more mature and he is very consistent in his posts - you sound like someone with multiple personality disorder. I do get lazy and don't provide numbers because they are at your fingertips and I doubt that you are interested in seeing numbers. But here are some and I hope I won't hear from you again:

Immigrants are not a sick bunch who are here to abuse our health care system:

Health status of Canada's immigrants

2000/01Two studies released today shed light on the so-called "healthy immigrant effect," which suggests that immigrants are healthier than the Canadian-born population, even when accounting for age differences between the two groups.

The health status of immigrants may be influenced by their personal characteristics as well as by the health requirements for entry into Canada. However, it has been observed that the longer immigrants live in Canada, the more their health resembles that of the Canadian-born population.

According to the study Health status and health behaviour among immigrants, based on the 2000/01 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS), 59.6% of immigrants reported that they had a chronic condition.

Consistent with previous research, this rate was significantly lower than the 65.2% for the Canadian-born population. Even after adjusting for age, education and income, the differences between immigrants and non-immigrants persisted. The study also revealed that the incidence of chronic conditions in general rose with time since immigration to Canada.

According to the CCHS, in 2000/01, 7.9% of Canadians aged 15 to 75 reported having experienced at least one major episode of depression in the 12 months before the survey. The rate among people born in Canada was 8.3%, whereas the rate among immigrants was significantly lower, at 6.2%.

Similarly, 2.1% of Canadians reported having experienced problems with alcohol dependence. Such symptoms were reported by 2.5% of the Canadian-born population, but only 0.5% of immigrants. The patterns for depression and alcohol dependence held when the rates were adjusted for age and sex.

This healthy immigrant effect was strongest among recent immigrants, according to the study Mental health of Canada's immigrants. Those from Asia in particular had the lowest rates of depression, and those from Africa had the lowest rates of alcohol dependence.

After accounting for such factors as age, sex, marital status, income and education, all immigrants except those who arrived at least 30 years ago had lower rates of alcohol dependence than the Canadian-born population. Similarly, adjustment for these demographic and socio-economic factors did not affect the patterns for depression. In other words, they do not account for the healthy immigrant effect.

These results on measures of mental health are consistent with previous findings on physical health, which showed that immigrants in Canada are in better health than the Canadian-born population. On the whole, immigrants reported fewer mental health problems than the Canadian-born population.

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/020919/d020919a.htm

Immigrants don't live on our backs:

In 2001 in the 25 to 44 age group, 2 years after landing

- 76% were in the skilled workers categories, only 5% were refugees

- 68% had university degrees (vs 19.5% % of Canadian-born in the same age group)

- 80% had worked since landing (39% of the remaining were in school)

- 50% were employed at 6 mths after landing, 63% at 2 years after landing (roughly the same as the rest of the Canadian population)

http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/89-6...001/t005_en.htm?

Overall immigrants are better educated than the Canadian-born population:

% with university degree in 25 to 44 age group: Immigrants 30.2%, Canadian-born 19.5%, Canada 21.8%.

http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/91-2...-XIE2003000.pdf pg. 107

This rate is not to be confused with the one above which pertains to immigrants 2 years after landing (in 1999). The rate of university educated immigrants has gone up very sharply in the last decade due to changes in selection criteria.

As I previously stated, we want the immigrants' children more than the immigrants themselves because their children do significantly better than our own:

- the children of immigrants catch-up to Canadian children in school by age 8 if their first language is English or French and by age 11 if their first language is other than E/F, and do better afterwards. http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/011114/d011114a.htm See the graphs in the middle of the page

- the children of immigrants are more likely to want university education - % of 15-yr-olds who want university education: visible minority immigrants (79%), Canadian-born non-visible-minority (57%) http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/11-0...511-008-XIE.pdf pg. 10

- the children of immigrants are more likely to get university education

Men in the 25 to 37 age group in 2001 with university degrees: children of immigrants (in 5 regional groups) 22.5% to 49.4%, third + generation Canadian 18.8%

Women in the 25 to 37 age group in 2001 with university degrees: children of immigrants (in 5 regional groups) 33.4% to 61.3%, third + generation Canadian 25.7%

http://www.statcan.ca/english/research/11F...9MIE2005267.pdf pg. 28

Contrary to popular belief here, education is not worthless:

% of people employed 25-44 age group (in 2005):

- < grade 9: 51.6%

- some secondary school: 69.1%

- high-school diploma: 80.2%

- post-secondary: 86%

The same trend applies to both men and women

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/labor62.htm

Average earnings (in 2001 in $):

Less than high school graduation certificate 21,230

High school graduation certificate and/or some postsecondary 25,477

Trades certificate or diploma 32,743

College certificate or diploma 32,736

University certificate, diploma or degree 48,648

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/labor50a.htm

[Saturn]

I go though all this time and research and here no argument back or no rebuttle.

Your "research" is "my co-worker said this" and "my girlfriend's second cousin did that". That hardly qualifies as an argument, and hence, you get nothing back.

Why?

Becuae I have an IQ of 136 and I'm never wrong?

Possibly.

You mean one of those internet "You are a genius!" IQ tests where they will send you a genius certificate for $10? Did you order your genius certificate yet?

[blueblood]

I suppose he's mad at the approx. 20% that make the rest look bad. I'm not saying that education is worthless, it's just not the holy grail of society, a person can make it without a university degree.

Would those numbers on the income be before or after taxes because even for University grads. those are some low numbers. Funny thing is my fuel bill is 60% of a university grads salary. I'll concede that maybe living in a city an education is more important, but living in the country a person can manage.

[mikedavid00]

Becuae I have an IQ of 136 and I'm never wrong?

Possibly.

That's not that impressive, I out do you by 20 points.

Really I thought the standard IQ test was out of 140. Then after you have to take a genius test from Mensa..

I was just joking about never being wrong, but the IQ portion I wasn't joking about. I won't place much bets over someone's high iq.

[mikedavid00]

I heard the people debate the best is when they are arguing a point on which they don't agree with as they tend to get "blinded" on topics that they feel passionate about

That's the thing - I don't feel passionate about my arguments. When I was a teen, I was the same as many people here on the forum; I thought that partieis were elcted becaue of a 'strong learder'. I thought that I should have control over society and things should be my way. I didn't trust that other Canadians could vote and think for themeselves. I used to think that immigrants were increadibly gifted people with no divorce rate. I never really understood borders, security, and the function of the economy. I thought it was the govt's job to ensure I was employed and it was the govt's job to ensure my well being. Then in University, you think your an adult when all you are is a little pip-squeek. Then you start to follow after a 'prof's word' and then the Liberal instatution will profess what the world is about. Professers will profess unto the students the economy and workplace despite the fact that most have never worked in the private sector a day in their lives. Prof's are really just glorified idealists and school bums. The young grad will get out of school, think he owns the world, will change the establishment, and guess what:

Then the real education starts - the University of Life.

As you grow more mature and are out in the real world and private sector, you loose your battles against the establishment, you go through hardships, and you realize the world and life isn't how you were told it was. You realize that your gov't simply is not there for your well being (in Canada). You begin to read, get informed, look up facts, and see things for what they are.

As you grow even older you feel it's your duty to correct these wrongs and might eventry to help out and give back to your community because you see them brainwashed as you once were.

But alas, people will act with their emotion, not logic and fact.

If you emotionally do not want to believe that majority people who enter Canada from Somalia use our welfare system, despite the numbers, the articles, and just the 'common knowledge' of those close to these circles, then you are only fooling yourself based off your own emotion and not the truth.

The truth is, our healthcare system is beyon repair. How you emotionally feel about that should not interfere with the truth.

I am most likely amongst the least emotional here.

[Saturn]

I suppose he's mad at the approx. 20% that make the rest look bad. I'm not saying that education is worthless, it's just not the holy grail of society, a person can make it without a university degree.

Would those numbers on the income be before or after taxes because even for University grads. those are some low numbers. Funny thing is my fuel bill is 60% of a university grads salary. I'll concede that maybe living in a city an education is more important, but living in the country a person can manage.

Those numbers are low because they are 2001 numbers (for tax year 2000). They should be 20-30% higher today in 2006 dollars. The gap between the university educated and the less educated has grown since then and I just read a study a couple of weeks ago which said that university educated women make roughly 3 times what women without degrees make, which is a very significant difference. For men the difference is less significant. But I can't find the study right now and I got tired of looking. Of course no one will starve without an education but in a situation where education is becoming more and more a must, high-school dropouts are going to do even worse on average in the future than they have in the past.

[mikedavid00]

Of course no one will starve without an education but in a situation where education is becoming more and more a must, high-school dropouts are going to do even worse on average in the future than they have in the past.

Doesn't Canada have the most educated workforce in the world?

(which I consider to be a back thing btw)