The Instigator
RobieRX
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Yassine
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

1 + 1 = 3 (mathmetics)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Yassine
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/11/2015 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,205 times Debate No: 75129
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (14)
Votes (1)

 

RobieRX

Pro

Con must prove 1 + 1 = 3 is false.

Debate Structure

Round 1: Con presents platform, Pro presents platform
Round 2: Con defends and refutes, Pro defends and refutes
Round 3: Con refutes and defends, Pro refutes and defends
Round 4: Con refutes and defends, Pro refutes and defends
Round 5: Con refutes, defends and concludes, Pro refutes, defends and concludes

Rules

1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. No forfeiture.
3. No trolling, lawyering, semantics and kritiks of the topic.
4. All arguments and sources must be visible inside the debate. Arguments and sources may not be posted in the comments section or in an outside link.
5. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed in the middle of the debate.
Yassine

Con

I thank Pro for instigating the debate, & I accept his challenge.

Best of luck.
Debate Round No. 1
RobieRX

Pro

1 + 1 = 3

Now con must provide evidence to support his theory that 1+1=3 is false. You see, math is a human invention which you can manipulate anytime, anywhere. So for example, I can make the number '1' equal '2'

we humans see that the number 1 is equal to number 1

Human Knowledge: 1=1
manipulation :1=2
Manipulation: 1=3

See I manipulated the numbers to try to solve the puzzle to the equation. Since the problem is asking if 1 + 1 = 3, I have made both number 1 and 1. And manupilated the numbers to 1.5 and 1.5.

1.5 +1.5 = 3

so if 1 + 1 = 3

1.5 + 1.5 = 3

So add .5 and .5 to the number 1 and 1 and you get the number 3.

So I get immediate victory because I have manipulated the equation and made it equal to 3.

http://mathforum.org...
http://www.brainpickings.org...
Yassine

Con

I thank Pro for submitting his opening argument.



Case:


Syllogism:

1. Let (E) be the equation: 1 + 1 = 3.

2. Let (e) be the equation: 2 = 3.

3. 1 + 1 = 2 & not-(e).

4. If (E), then (e) & not-(e).

5. The proposition: (e) & not-(e) is false.

6. Therefore, (E) is false.


Defence of syllogism:

3. => True, for both propositions: 1 + 1 = 2, & 2 =/= 3 are true by design.

4. => True, for if (E), then 1 + 1 = 3, i.e. 2 = 3, while 2 =/= 3, thus 2 = 3 & 2 =/= 3.

5. => True, by the law of non contradiction [1].

6. => True, by denying the consequent [2].


Conclusion:

(E): 1 + 1 = 3 is false.



Rebuttals:


we humans see that the number 1 is equal to number 1

Human Knowledge: 1=1

manipulation :1=2

- False, for 1 =/= 2, by design.


Manipulation: 1=3

- False, for 1 =/= 3, be design.


See I manipulated the numbers to try to solve the puzzle to the equation. Since the problem is asking if 1 + 1 = 3, I have made both number 1 and 1. And manupilated the numbers to 1.5 and 1.5.

- False, for 1 =/= 1.5, by design.


1.5 +1.5 = 3

so if 1 + 1 = 3

1.5 + 1.5 = 3

So add .5 and .5 to the number 1 and 1 and you get the number 3.

So I get immediate victory because I have manipulated the equation and made it equal to 3.

- Pro assumes false premises & arrives at false conclusions. So much fallaciousness can not be overlooked!



Conclusion:


- Pro failed to carry his BOP by resorting to invalid arguments & fallacious reasoning. Whereas, I proved conclusively that the proposition: 1 + 1 = 3 is false, thus conclusively negating the resolution.


=> Vote Con.



Sources:


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...

Debate Round No. 2
RobieRX

Pro

RobieRX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
RobieRX

Pro

RobieRX forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
RobieRX

Pro

RobieRX forfeited this round.
Yassine

Con

Extend.


=> Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
@Yassine - I set myself a challenge. I will vote on this in your favor in a period of 3 months.
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
Voted.
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
Cool. I pass the ELO restrictions. I feel so special.
Posted by Yassine 1 year ago
Yassine
@ salam.morcos

- LoL! Come on, I am not that desperate >_< , unless you're eager to vote on a debate of mine, then here you go:
* http://www.debate.org...
Posted by salam.morcos 1 year ago
salam.morcos
Yassine should create a separate account and lose 30 debates with bsh1!
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
ELO might be set as high as 8000, in which case you'll have to wait and hope RoyLatham or bsh1 raise their ELO a bit in the next few months.
Posted by salam.morcos 1 year ago
salam.morcos
Yassine - You should ask someone from the leaders to vote on this. This is a no brainer debate. Just PM them (or leave a post in the forum)

http://www.debate.org...
Posted by Yassine 2 years ago
Yassine
- 6 months voting period, & over 5,000 Elo restriction!!!! What was he thinking!
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
5000+ ELO is insufficient to vote.
Posted by Yassine 2 years ago
Yassine
- Piece of cake :P.

- I am waiting of what Pro has to say.

"And RXR copied my rules ."

- That's probably why they don't make much sense.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
RobieRXYassineTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro drops all the arguments and rebuttals presented by Con. Pro forfeits twice. Args and conduct to Con.