Not sure what this topic is about. Asking questions but no debate? How does that work?
Agnostic?
Sort:
Rather than trying to refute people’s views with evidence, you could ask people revealing and defeating questions and watch them flail. If you are an atheist (either agnostic or gnostic) or part of a religion, then this thread is not for you.
I'm an atheist and I can explain my point of view well. I'm sceptical of the brand of agnostic who claims we cannot know whether God exists or not. I'm not sceptical of people who say they don't know and I call them descriptive agnostics. They're ok: but prescriptive agnostics, who tell me that I cannot possibly know, are clearly not agnostics. Anyone not understand why?
I don't exactly get off when someone tells me that he likes to watch his opponents "flail", when I know well that he is going to be the one who will be "flailing", if anyone. That kind of speech indicates that such a person doesn't want a discussion at all.
Well the “flail” part is simply to help someone recognize flaws in their views by letting them discover it themself. Their view likely won’t change in that argument, but it will plant a seed of doubt in their mind for a while and they’ll research it more, which is more desirable imo than just defeating someone’s view. I view personal growth as a greater positive than holding correct beliefs, as personal growth will lead to holding more correct beliefs
This will be led by agnostics (no de facto people), but religious and atheists will be asked questions and asking questions. No debate!