I'm new. I'll debate anything.

INTRO. I think I will debunk your statements a little bit before talking about your main arguments. First of all quotation marks are not arbitrary, they are used for emphasis of certain words or phrases, because the alterative, CAPS, may be taken as "shouting" at the person you're talking to. Debate partner (DP) said "My adversary squandered any opportunity to take advantage of this mistake" Why, but more importantly , how could I even take advantage of the fact that this was an empty debate?! Can you give an example? DP says I "dashed off a discursive and pointless discussion of bananas". Actually I only took the liberty to look at your profile , so that I can see if you wrote something there, or left it blank, like your first round in this debate. And until you argue why it is pointless, it is just as pointless as your try to win this debate by countering my profile statements. -------------------------------- Argument about Television. I will first debunk your statements, then I'll argue that television is indeed a tool for indoctrination. First of all, you make stupid assumptions about me. "(I also take it that your hatred of television was not balanced by a love of books.)" I don't "hate" television, just like I don't "hate" may other things that I don't like or disagree with. This is similar to Christians often saying that atheists hate God... And for my love of books , you have no idea what books I read or like. What I choose to write at my profile is my business and a reasonable and logical person wouldn't imply such nonsense like you are implying. "And even if nothing on television ever appeals to you--which is a reasonable position--you shouldn't adopt a presumtive contempt for those that do watch TV." Christians say that I should not adopt a presumptive contempt for those who pray to God , just because I don't love God. No, thanks, I think I'll have my way about everything. I don't need anybody to tell my what I should or shouldn't do. Sheeple are sheeple and I show no mercy for sheeple. Debate partener quotes my belief summary from my profile and comments: " "My belief is that people should keep their beliefs private." This linguistic masterpiece is not only refuted by everything else on your profile, but it actually manages to refute itself. I must confess that the logic deployed therein does not suggest an author of wily debate-mastery, but I hope nevertheless that your rebuttal proves me wrong" This "linguistic masterpiece" as you call it, is the way I chose to represent a part of my way of thinking concerning "Beliefs" at my profile. As such it can't be refuted because it is not even a subject of debate or refutation. This still stands if I had said that my belief is that stupid people should kill themselves. I see that you're really trying, but try to concentrate on more consistent and relevant issues. Who knows, you may even have interesting things to say if you do that. -------------------------- -TV is amongst other things, redundant. You can watch what programs you like on the computer. But of course at the computer you are left with so many choices, and many people have no idea of what to do if left alone. Clearly TV is sucessful because of the sheer numbers of sheeple. This is how they became sheeple in the first place. Losing your little time to watch tv turns your brain into a pile of s**t . About 99.99 of what is transmitted on TV is useless information or boring entertainment for the masses. I don't want to add anything more, I think I took this "debate" a little too serious already for what it's worth.