tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688138290971915830.post880513684423936866..comments2024-03-25T21:35:47.298-07:00Comments on Interdependent Science: Supporting DebateJimKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16167191806249119508noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688138290971915830.post-50151987525333997752011-05-25T18:41:21.506-07:002011-05-25T18:41:21.506-07:00Here is a list of tools:
http://wiki.lesswrong.co...Here is a list of tools:<br /><br />http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Debate_toolsJimKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16167191806249119508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688138290971915830.post-59471519370403032712011-05-25T18:40:38.316-07:002011-05-25T18:40:38.316-07:00Here's another:
http://www.argunet.org/workin...Here's another:<br /><br />http://www.argunet.org/working-with-argunet/JimKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16167191806249119508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688138290971915830.post-72192425590569158212011-05-25T18:36:05.045-07:002011-05-25T18:36:05.045-07:00One good preliminary exercise is to study folks th...One good preliminary exercise is to study folks that have done similar things already, e.g.<br /><br />http://debategraph.org/homeJimKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16167191806249119508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688138290971915830.post-57316178821692737482011-05-09T15:55:11.557-07:002011-05-09T15:55:11.557-07:00I'm looking a little at various content manage...I'm looking a little at various content management systems that I might be able to use to build this. WordPress doesn't look powerful enough, at least this is out of their target zone. Drupal, on the other hand, looks like a good fit.JimKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16167191806249119508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688138290971915830.post-74088193701793720272011-04-25T19:17:34.778-07:002011-04-25T19:17:34.778-07:00I wonder, too, Richard, if we actually developed t...I wonder, too, Richard, if we actually developed this idea together twenty years ago. Our offices were next door to each other! And we certainly took part in some intense computer-mediated debates in those days! I've been thinking about this scheme for many years too, though I don't remember the specific origin.JimKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16167191806249119508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688138290971915830.post-47617435153164549542011-04-25T19:04:57.474-07:002011-04-25T19:04:57.474-07:00Thanks much, Richard, you have the spirit of the i...Thanks much, Richard, you have the spirit of the idea precisely. Thanks too for bringing up rebuttals. It does seem like arguments need to refer to each other somehow, to reinforce or rebut.<br /><br />Usually when I have sketched this system out for myself, it quickly gets far too complex. Finding the right balance, enough structure but not too much, to be a container for unbounded complexity without getting tangled up in the complexity... I think it ought to be possible!<br /><br />I'll keep you in the loop... it'd be grand fun to make something happen!JimKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16167191806249119508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688138290971915830.post-43361336616947996322011-04-25T18:33:49.162-07:002011-04-25T18:33:49.162-07:00I've had a similar idea floating around my hea...I've had a similar idea floating around my head for about 20 years. I think it started back at IBM where they had some discussion forums covering really interesting topics. One I remember is a discussion about whether or not a computer could every behave like a human brain.<br /><br />There were several positions that emerged, but the arguments tended to get lost in the archives and then repeat. The same arguments would resurface, sometimes clearly, sometimes not so clear. Overall there was really not much advancement in the ideas because the best arguments were lost in history and the technology didn't support a robust debate.<br /><br />I've always wondered about how to create a site where the strongest arguments on each side of an issue could float to the surface and be preserved. My thinking on the topic usually ends up with a human moderator to identify the strongest posts and move them to the top. The idea of incorporating a good voting system could eliminate the need for the moderator. Challenges would including keeping the voting fair, free from spam etc.<br /><br />I'd love to see the idea move forward. <br /><br />I think of controversial topics like abortion, evolution, atomic power, whatever. As you've suggested, the system would not need to resolve the debate, but could capture the best arguments in favor of each position. Such a system could be an amazing resource. Newcomers to the debate could be presented with the best arguments for each position. The best supported, most clear, most easily understood arguments developed by people over time would move to the top. The key to me is to keep the different positions separate so that the strongest arguments in favor of each position can be preserved. Rebuttal is important too, but it should be possible to read through all the "pros" without having to be interrupted by the "cons." Perhaps links to opposing arguments could be integrated in there somehow.<br /><br />Rather than relying on headlines and sound bites people could quickly have access to the best arguments on all major positions when developing their own opinions. This could be an amazing resource for really advancing debate and decision-making.<br /><br />Count me in to participate - maybe even to help out.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02380519620345112095noreply@blogger.com