It seems to me that a prerequisite for "debating" anything is being capable of being wrong, so I was curious to know how many posters have satisfied the prerequisite.
I have in the past admitted to be wrong or been in error regarding:
1. underestimating the value of the southern states' slaves at the time of the Civil War by about two orders of magnitude
2. being a college libertarian (tandeetaylor cured me of this ailment)
3. believing that embryos/fetuses were not distinct organisms
4. debating the existence of God (strike 1), and using the invisible pink unicorn argument (strike 2) - it turns out that it's pointless to debate the existence of God, and that invisible pink unicorns really do exist
5. stating that Amazon.com would die along with the other .coms when the bubble burst (fortunately I didn't have any money to invest at the time)
I have in the past admitted to be wrong or been in error regarding:
1. underestimating the value of the southern states' slaves at the time of the Civil War by about two orders of magnitude
2. being a college libertarian (tandeetaylor cured me of this ailment)
3. believing that embryos/fetuses were not distinct organisms
4. debating the existence of God (strike 1), and using the invisible pink unicorn argument (strike 2) - it turns out that it's pointless to debate the existence of God, and that invisible pink unicorns really do exist
5. stating that Amazon.com would die along with the other .coms when the bubble burst (fortunately I didn't have any money to invest at the time)
Comment