Creationism and Evolution

As Con, it is my position that it is worth debating these concepts. In almost all cases, it makes no difference what is being debated for the debate to have value. In instances where the topics may seem ridiculous, there still exists a scenario for critical thinking and inherent potential for advancing the pursuit of truth. Not all debates are equal, there are some moderated and organized poorly, but it's worth holding all debates nonetheless, regardless of whether or not they are scientific. As my opponents correctly asserts, there are negative agendas that can be associated with these debates, however that still doesn't mean they shouldn't happen. There are always going to be people who will attempt to reinforce their view with everything they hear, and it clearly happens on both sides of every argument. The best way for us all to fight this natural inclination is to constantly hear as many views as possible, and debating them is one of the best ways to do that. This is true whether is it a publicly held debate or a debate someone is having with them self. Even if they are simply exploring an issue they have already come to a conclusion about, critical thinking of our own beliefs and ideology allows us to change or reinforce them. Regardless of the subject, I can find no time when questioning anything can be considered a negative thing. As for this specific case, regarding creationism versus evolution, I find no definitive contradiction between the two, and therefore believe that debating them is even more important. I will now respond to each of my opponent's arguments individually: 1. A debate does not need to be scientific to be beneficial. 2. Debates do not need to be on equal footing (regarding what is being debated), though ideally the debaters should be of similar qualification and/or ability if it is in a public forum. 3. The behavior of some does not mean we shouldn't continue debating. 4. The claim of some creationists does not mean we should never debate about creationism and evolution. The credibility of those who act unethically will be apparent to those who want to follow a debate objectively. 5. A debate suggests that two people will take an opposing view for an allotted time with no guarantee of any resolution at all. 6. All debates on a topic cannot stop simply because of possible bad intentions by some. These debates have no effect on science, and can often be dismissed as ‘pseudo-philosophical theater'. Ideologues will reinforce their view regardless. Therefore simply having the debate can be worthwhile for those who do want to learn about two different points of view. 7. Debates on philosophy often feature very little science and can still be productive. 8. Agenda driven debates that are unfair should be discouraged, but this does not include all debates on the subject. 9. Some are, some aren't. Nothing is gained by completely avoiding a popular subject of contention. Debates with more credibility will attract those who wish to look at the issue objectively. 10. A debate does not have to be scientific to have value. It simply needs to present various ideas. The listener should always be thinking critically, especially when the debate's organization stacks against either point of view. 11. We should encourage people to follow debates objectively (and recognize propaganda), we shouldn't end them simply because some are unable to. 12. Looking past the charismatic nature of the debaters is the responsibility of anyone who is listening. Those who want to gain something from any debate will think critically about each point. Those who want to reinforce their point of view will not. Should we cancel all debates because of the latter group? 13. The time spent on such things is up to the discretion of the individual. If their goal is to argue from either point of view in a public forum, it would seem to be an efficient way to be sure they understood their position, and thus is not wasted time. To summarize my arguments: 1) All debates should continue unopposed as nearly all hold some value. 2) Creationism and evolution are not necessarily contradictory concepts and therefore require an infinite number of debates to potentially reconcile these major ideas. 3) Those who are interested in exploring these concepts objectively will listen critically, and avoid certain debates outright. 4) We do not need to stop debating this topic simply because there are those who are misguided or intend to misinform.