i offer a challenge to anyone interested in debating the issue of communism vs capitalism. before the debate begins, a general definition of each economic theory will be agreed upon by both contenders.
this debate will focus partly on which economic system is “better”, as defined by specific criteria (better by such standards as producing more human happiness and wellbeing/material prosperity/moral goodness/promotion of universally-accepted humanitarian rights), but the debate will primarily focus on examining the philosophical foundations of each economic theory. each side will enumerate and defend the epistemological, ethical and metaphysical implications and assumptions inherent in their theory, as well as addressing and refuting those inherent in the opposing viewpoint.
i will debate for the side of capitalism, and i call for anyone interested in debating for the side of communism. you do not have to actually believe in communism as an economic theory, but you must be able to successfully defend it and advocate for it regardless of what you believe. if anyone is interested, please PM me directly or reply to this thread, and we can begin setting up the specific details with the moderators, thanks.
I accept, but a couple of things first.
I am in the middle of several things and have limited time,
so the time schedule must be very flexible.
I am not a big fan of formal, so I see no real reason to involve
too many other people. I lay out my viewpoints and you lay out yours
and then I comment and then you comment. Perhaps 3 or 4 rounds of comments
allowed, with a closing set of arguments. so perhaps at most 5 rounds of comments.
The only thing we need someone else for is to play judge/referee.
It can begin in a couple of weeks as I need time to do homework.
let me know if this works for you.
thanks for the split-- i will be debating peter; rules and definitions have not yet been established. hopefully soon we can get these worked out, and then begin.
no, this debate never materialized. however i would still be interested. if i had a perference i would prefer to argue the side of communism actually, as i prefer in debates to argue sides which i do not personally believe in.
but i could go either way, if you have a strong preference to argue that side (assuming you would be my opponent). right now im in a debate on legalization of marijuana, so when that finishes up and i get a few days free ill PM you if youre still interested, and we can work out some details.
I was hoping for communism, but since we both prefer it we could get an outside observer to flip a coin or something. Or, alternatively, we could do two and each argue both sides.
no thats cool, i can debate for capitalism. it would be far easier for me to do so, anyways; its just that when i debate i prefer the challenge, and also how, when debating for a side you dont believe in, it forces you into an ultra-objective or ultra-rational state of mind where passion or personal sentiment play no part-- therefore for me at least it is the best way to approach argumentation.
but i will be more than happy to debate for capitalism. if youd like, draft up some basic rules and PM me, and if you have any idea for judges let me know. i dont really care at all about judges, i think its good to have at least one just as a formality but it could be anyone… although there are some on ILP that i would not accept, of course. so just let me know.
itll be about a week or so until i can realistically start this debate, though. maybe by then we can get the rules, judge(s) and stuff sorted out.
