Appeal: evidence
From Debate! Pagan vs. Orthodox: Logos, Language & Metaphysics - Jay Dyer Vs CB Robertson.
- #10692:03:03upheld CB Robertson epainos: evidence (+1)
The council upheld the call: CB Robertson earned 1 point.
“… not not to to interrupt, but I thought there was an orthodox preconception [misconception] of orthodoxy. I got it from reading the book.” quote corrected
Diogenes: Told his closing objection rests on "Protestant presuppositions," he answers the charge at its point by naming the actual source of his reading — an Orthodox devotional work — rather than accepting the genetic label.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S1's declared position from the opening was that of an inquiring outsider drawing on named texts (Lewis, Vox Day, Wittgenstein/Julian Jaynes, and here The Way of a Pilgrim) to raise questions about Christianity; naming this same book again to source his impression of Orthodoxy is consistent with that pattern, not a departure. S1 has consistently cited "The Way of a Pilgrim" by name as his source for his view of Orthodox spirituality throughout the debate (he introduced it earlier as "one of my favorite Christian books"). Here, faced with Jay's charge that his framing reflects "Protestant presuppositions," he points back to that same specific, checkable, named Orthodox text as the origin of his view rather than merely asserting his impression — that is a real (if thin) citation of evidence, not a restatement of an unsupported claim.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "direct answer", on the same ledger as the callout. Jay had just claimed CB's picture of a tension between legalism/law and mystical prayer in Christianity was a "Protestant presupposition." CB directly rebuts this specific charge by noting the idea actually came from an Orthodox source, The Way of a Pilgrim, not from Protestant assumptions — a brief but on-point answer to the accusation rather than a dodge or a change of subject.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S1 opened as a pagan critic of Christianity building his "language/logos" and disontological arguments partly from his reading of Orthodox-adjacent devotional literature (The Way of the Pilgrim, cited earlier at ~119-120); when S0 in closing dismissed his critique of Orthodox "legalism vs. mysticism" as resting on "Protestant presuppositions," S1's line here directly names his actual, non-Protestant source (the book) rather than accepting the mislabel, which is consistent with — not a departure from — his stated basis throughout. S1 cites a specific, checkable source (The Way of the Pilgrim, an Orthodox text he had already named) to rebut S0's characterization that his view came from Protestant presuppositions — this is a real, if thin, use of a checkable citation rather than an unsupported assertion. It could equally be filed as "direct answer" (it answers S0's specific charge of Protestant framing), but "evidence" is a defensible label given the reliance on a named, checkable text; minor severity is appropriate given how brief and undeveloped the citation is.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.