If you were to arrange a debate...

Post Reply New Topic

...between a great mind on the left and a great mind on the right - who would it be and why?

Leon Trotsky from the Left

I'm tempted to say someone along the lines of Lincoln or G Washington for the right..

Kinda gets problematic though as different people put in different contexts can shift a little to the left or a little to the right - sometimes switch entirely (Cromwell was a left revolutionary force in his day compared to the Feudal lords but today? Probably be on the Right)

Also what would be the debate on? Freedom or the best emancipatory vision for mankind? Depending on the debate topic I'd be tempted to change personnel - Karl Marx v. Milton Friedman/F Hayek would be an economics death match.

Is this a matter without regard to how good this person may be in debate? For example, some figures I wouldn't know how well they could debate, or they could potentially be terrible debaters, so I am wondering if this should be a metric for judgment or if it is just supposed to be "Great Minds Conflict!! !"

That's just it - I'm not calling that one. That's part of where the 'why' comes in - anything from economics, geopolitical predestiny or lack thereof, evidence of a soul or otherwise, defining what the future of societal values should be in the western world, high level arguments over theism or lack thereof - I guess that's not ruling out toilet paper - over or under - but I take it most people would want a bit more acumen out of it.

If it were someone who just isn't going to be super quick at speaking or who's incredible in writing - it could be that as well, just that I'd imagine their ability to command the conversation at least equally in some medium would need to be there, otherwise I guess you'd really have to say that they're a great artist or solo writer and leave it there.

I would love to see Obama's full agenda completely exposed by Leon Trotsky
- there is so much confusion and spin about what the administration is up to, Trotsky would expose the true nature of what is going on piece by piece.

And Marx Vs Friedrich von Hayek

For obvious reasons



Rosa Luxemburg Vs Eduard Bernstein

- Bernsteins revisionism led the way to the betrayal of the German working class, which in turn doomed the Russian and Chinese revolutions to failure. Tragically it also allowed the SPD to support the WW1 rather than mobilise the masses against it.

and one debate that I would dearly love to see, not from the political spectrum.

Richard Dawkins Vs Jonathan Sarfarti

- I am sick and tired of Sarfarti being held up as a credible foil to evolutionary theory, the man has a Genius IQ and can play a great game of chess, but his field of expertise is inorganic chemistry, not evolutionary biology.

ooh...

Jack London vs. Jack Kerouac

Yeah, the issue that causes me questions is whether Hayek is a good debater or not compared to Friedman. Friedman is known for being a good debater. Hayek doesn't seem like he'd be.


Well, the real issue is whether this would go well. I'd think that the two men would speak past each other. Dawkins just dismisses creationism as history denialism.

Point taken, so the next question is who should facilitate / moderate the discussion

Santa Claus should be the moderator. Either him or, Dan Rather, or Oprah Winfrey...

Marlee Matlin would be awesome.

Are you sure it shouldn't be Christopher Hitchens?

Also, a major thing I wonder at this moment is whether Daniel Dennett might be good at this or not(debating Sarfati that is, not moderating). I mean, the issue is how much of this debate is going to be over science proper, and how much of the debate is also going to get into meta-scientific issues, such as methodology and other things. Dennett is a professional philosopher and thus knows meta-science better than Dawkins and also knows science alright(he wrote a book on evolution called Darwin's Dangerous Idea). Dawkins is likely unquestionably better at the science, but likely is not as good at the meta-science.(he's not dumb, but this isn't his specialty)

Whoever you'd want. I figure this - the moderator would probably be chosen on the specific debaters as well as the content that's up for grabs.

Malcolm X and David Duke...

Now THAT would be interesting.

Pat Robertson and Richard Simmons.

MLK v. Malcolm X

Obama v. Pat Robertson