Why Are Men Dominating the Debate About Birth Control for Women?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Journey said:
I think majority of members here look at and consider logic in their debates and arguments. However, the fact is, an argument may be logical without necessarily being true.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Any and all discussion based on falsehood is called a lie. Debate and/or arguments based on falsehood are never logical.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Doesn't it say a lot that if a man gets shamed and shunned for having sex, it's only because he had sex with a very young girl (or boy for that matter)?? And some of them even get away with it?

What does that tell you?
Click to expand...

It tells me nothing because I was using this as an example but was not being inclusive. Men such as, again an example not inclusive, JFK, Bill C. , Jesse Jackson, Gingrich to name a few should also be shamed by the population for their actions. Doing so helps the population to reinforce the principle that these men's behavior should not be copied.
 
rolling7 said:
It tells me nothing because I was using this as an example but was not being inclusive. Men such as, again an example not inclusive, JFK, Bill C. , Jesse Cabochon, Gingrich to name a few should also be shamed by the population for their actions. Doing so helps the population to reinforce the principle that these men's behavior should not be copied.
Click to expand...
Who is Jesse Cabochon? I couldn't find him on Google.
 
rolling7 said:
Incorrect. Any and all discussion based on falsehood is called a lie. Debate and/or arguments based on falsehood are never logical.
Click to expand...

I believe both of you are partially correct. The purpose an argument/debate is to detect falsehood. An argument based on a lie would be an incorrect or illogical argument.

That would be the whole point.
 
Interesting point you have there. However, I would never begin an argument with the purpose to detect falsehood. I would only expect truth and logic to play a part in any discussion, however, that is just me.
 
rolling7 said:
Interesting point you have there. However, I would never begin an argument with the purpose to detect falsehood. I would only expect truth and logic to play a part in any discussion, however, that is just me.
Click to expand...

And, that truth and logic can sway your opinion giving you a new truth, correct? Otherwise, it's just two stubborn people talking and not a debate at all.
 
rolling7 said:
Incorrect. Any and all discussion based on falsehood is called a lie. Debate and/or arguments based on falsehood are never logical.
Click to expand...

In a debate or argument, each side believes their argument is logical based on their own thinking. Really does anyone argue their view if they themselves believe it to be illogical? However, logic does not always equate with truthfulness. Let's look at a basic example:

A car has a long history of problems with the starter, only the starter.
Today the car does not start.
Conclusion: The starter must be malfunctioning again.
This is completely logical thinking. However, when the problem is looked into further, the truth is the battery is dead.

The point is, it is important to consider and accept all facts to come to both a logical and truthful conclusion. Therefore, stating something akin to "there is no need for data ... only logic" to support a stance, is untrue (and, in my thinking, illogical).
 
VacationGuy234 said:
And, that truth and logic can sway your opinion giving you a new truth, correct? Otherwise, it's just two stubborn people talking and not a debate at all.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily because one person's logic and truth can reinforce another person's and make the second person more assured in their position/opinion.
 
Journey said:
In a debate or argument, each side believes their argument is logical based on their own thinking. Really does anyone argue their view if they themselves believe it to be illogical? However, logic does not always equate with truthfulness. Let's look at a basic example:

A car has a long history of problems with the starter, only the starter.
Today the car does not start.
Conclusion: The starter must be malfunctioning again.
This is completely logical thinking. However, when the problem is looked into further, the truth is the battery is dead.

The point is, it is important to consider and accept all facts to come to both a logical and truthful conclusion. Therefore, stating something akin to "there is no need for data ... only logic" to support a stance, is untrue (and, in my thinking, illogical).
Click to expand...

I could totally agree with you but for the fact that data is man-made and can be framed any which way a person would want it to come out.
 
I have done a lot of looking and asking and reading to try and find the answer to my own question: "Question ... Financially what is the difference between a Catholic and non-Catholic hospital? Specifically who (or what entity/entities) fund(s) the administration and running of a Catholic hospital?". Near as I can tell, there is not a whole lot, both are big business and both receive federal and state funding (whether they list themselves as non-profit or not).

"As nonprofit institutions, Catholic hospitals benefit from significant amounts of public funding, including state and federal grants for Title X family planning programs, Medicare and Medicaid." http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/topics/healthcare/documents/CFCMemoontheDirectivesweb.pdf

It was also brought to my attention that Catholic hospitals are consider non-profit and, therefore, receive federal tax exemptions.
 
rolling7 said:
I could totally agree with you but for the fact that data is man-made and can be framed any which way a person would want it to come out.
Click to expand...

But one's logic in an argument is not?? If logic is only logical if it is supported by truths and truths are based in fact, then ignoring historical facts/data can (and often does) lead to illogical arguments and conclusions.
 
rolling7 said:
I could totally agree with you but for the fact that data is man-made and can be framed any which way a person would want it to come out.
Click to expand...

Only with a degree in marketing..

If you want to take a Sophist approach to debate that's fine, but you need to support the absence of truth.
 
DeafCaroline said:
You just reminded me of two books I bought at a living village in Arkansas, titled "Mountain Mama" and "No Lace for Cricket". True stories of a single mother living in the Ozarks at the turn of the century.

Those books perfectly illustrated the hardships of women like your mother. I have to say I bow down to women like the ones in those books and to women like your mother.
Click to expand...

My grandma lived in Russia in the 1800's and she had 4 boys and there was no doctors in her village. They lived in a hut with a dirt floor and and had to hunt for dead animals in a cave for food or eat the by product of animals that where throw away. Her husband would go away for days and leave her to care for her 4 boys alone. He was once gone awhile and when my grandfather came back and found his wife pregnant with my dad he did not believe the baby was his!
 
Journey said:
But one's logic in an argument is not?? If logic is only logical if it is supported by truths and truths are based in fact, then ignoring historical facts/data can (and often does) lead to illogical arguments and conclusions.
Click to expand...

Data and Facts are two different things.
 
Or:

Computing Dictionary
data definition

data, data processing, jargon
/day't*/ (Or "raw data") Numbers, characters, images, or other method of recording, in a form which can be assessed by a human or (especially) input into a computer, stored and processed there, or transmitted on some digital channel. Computers nearly always represent data in binary.
Data on its own has no meaning, only when interpreted by some kind of data processing system does it take on meaning and become information.
For example, the binary data 01110101 might represent the integer 117 or the ASCII lower case U character or the blue component of a pixel in some video. Which of these it represents is determined by the way it is processed (added, printed, displayed, etc.). Even these numbers, characters or pixels however are still not really information until their context is known, e.g. my bank balance is £117, there are two Us in "vacuum", you have blue eyes.
(2007-09-10)

dictionary.com
 
I suppose data could be falsified, tallied incorrectly, or intentionally misleading, in which case the data may not be factual.

That's the problem with data. If it's handled by humans, it's subject to error.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top