Would you want to see cutting edge theoretical debates?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the idea of hosting online debates between leading advocates of opposing theories in various scientific fields, including quantum mechanics and genetics. Participants express interest in the potential for a platform that facilitates these debates and the associated discussions among the audience.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express enthusiasm for the concept of organized debates among respected theorists in various fields.
  • One participant mentions a specific debate in genetics regarding the existence of whole genome haplotype blocks, highlighting the contentious nature of such discussions in scientific communities.
  • Another participant suggests that the debates should focus on relevant and provocative topics, such as the significance of genome-wide scans in research.
  • Concerns are raised about the target audience for the proposed debates, with suggestions that the platform may need to cater more to the research community rather than high school students.
  • Participants discuss the challenges of selecting appropriate topics and representatives for the debates, emphasizing the need for knowledgeable individuals who can effectively communicate their ideas.
  • There is mention of existing debate forums, indicating that similar platforms already exist, which may influence the proposed idea.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the interest in theoretical debates, but there are differing views on the target audience and the feasibility of organizing such discussions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of implementation and the selection of topics and participants.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the uncertainty about the audience's engagement level and the practical challenges of organizing debates with leading experts. There is also a lack of consensus on which topics would be most engaging or relevant for the proposed platform.

Would you use this website?

  • I would go and read the debate in my field of interest, but not participate in the public forum

    Votes: 1 11.1%
  • I would go and read the debate in my field of interest and participate in the public discussion of t

    Votes: 5 55.6%
  • I would go and read most of the debates whether they are fields that I normally deal with or not, bu

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I would go and read most of the debates whether they are fields that I normally deal with or not, an

    Votes: 2 22.2%
  • I might be inclined to visit the site and browse over the topic/s, but I probably wouldn't really re

    Votes: 1 11.1%
  • It sounds boring to me, why would I want to go read something so technical?

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    9
Another God
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Messages
978
Reaction score
4
Would you want to see cutting edge theoretical debates?

Howdy everyone, I am doing a little bit of 'research' for a website idea of mine and I am very very eager for some feedback on it.

Essentially I want to know if you, the people of our world who are interested in Science/Engineering/Philosophy would be interested in reading an online debate between leading advocates of opposing theories.

Say someone could organise the most respected QM theorists (for example), one for each opposing theory to agree to participate in an online forum and argue for each of their cases over a period of time, would You go and read what they say?

If you are interested in any other field (Say how the mind works, what the pyramids were for, how complexity arises, what black holes are...whatever), then assume that is the debate that will be on display, and my question to you is: Would you actively go to the website and read the debate?

(there would also be forums available in the background for you to discuss the debates with other people, although no one could participate in the professional debate...)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you want to give me any more help, feel free to offer topics that you would like to see debated and who you think would be good at representing either side. Any comments and or suggestions at all would be appreciated actually. Thanks.
 
THis is a self selected poll. Any lurker who would actually fire up and vote is a potential contributer! Therefore he/she would pick option 2.
 
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
THis is a self selected poll. Any lurker who would actually fire up and vote is a potential contributer! Therefore he/she would pick option 2.
I think so too, we ARE on physics forums you know..

The question will be: what are these debates going to be about and how are you going to motivate the experts.

I mean, in my field there is the debate whether whole genome haplotype blocks exist or not, and whether those can be defined. I went to a conference and this was the hot topic there, researchers claiming that it was the holy grail, after which the opposer point blank said it was crap that was Leena Peltonen vs Joe Terwilliger for those who know Joe Terwilliger, know how opinionated and straight to the point he is

So yeah, I'd like him to debate something. For him to do that, the website needs to have a REAL scientific community. Right now all the debates are fought out in publications and at conferences already..
 
For instance, you could also debate the use of performing all those genome wide scans to look if a gene for a certain fenotype can be found.

Again ask J. Terwilliger for that, he also rediculed the researchers by compairing the effort with collecting a research sample of people who have broken their leg, you might find a stupidity gene

Or debate the number of research participants that are needed to make results from a whole genomescan significant.

All interesting things to find out, but are you in the right forum for the audience? You ARE asking an audience of high school students. For what you have in mind to work, you need to target the research community for your audience.
 
Once again Monique, thank you for all of the consideration. I am taking them all in, and they are all things that I will have to deal with if I am to make this happen. I have brought a couple of friends of mine into this with me (there is no way I could do it alone (even with the PF community assisting me!)) and we are discussing all of the variables and considerations. The process of selecting the topics and selecting the repreentatives of those topics is a long way off (this probably won't happen for 2 years...) but when it does come, we will have to work hard to figure out not only which topics are worth being discuss, which topics are discussble, but also who is will to discuss this stuff for the public and do so to the best of their ability. So in reality, we're going to need not only the most knowledgeable about any given field, but we are also going to need people who have a knack for presenting their knowledge...
 
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
THis is a self selected poll. Any lurker who would actually fire up and vote is a potential contributer! Therefore he/she would pick option 2.
Thats OK. I don't really need to see positive vs negative votes...all that matters is whether there are people who are interested or not. If bugger all people are interested, then there is no point.
 
You already saw the Nature and the Science debate forums? And that other forum, sciencedebates.com? I've put it in your other thread :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K