The Instigator
Benshapiro
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Merrit
Con (against)
Winning
39 Points

2 + 2 does not equal 4

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 9 votes the winner is...
Merrit
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/30/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,451 times Debate No: 36175
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (9)

 

Benshapiro

Pro

First round is for acceptance :)
Merrit

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Benshapiro

Pro

'Believe it or not, sometimes 2 + 2 does not equal 4. It depends on what type of measurement scale you are using. There are four types of measurement scales– nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio. Only in the last two categories does 2 + 2 = 4. Let me explain.

All the nominal scale does is name or classify. Each number merely represents a category or individual. For example, numbers on baseball or football uniforms are only nominal. Having the number "1" on your uniform does not necessarily mean you are "numero uno" (the best) in your sport. Social security numbers are also nominal. All they do is name or classify the individual.

The ordinal scale has all the qualities of the nominal scale plus the ability to rank objects according to some attribute. If you ranked all the members of a group according to height, "1" would be the tallest, "2" the second tallest and so on. However, the intervals between these rankings are not necessarily equal.If the tallest people were 5'11", 5'8" and 5'7", respectively, the interval between the first two ranks would be 3 inches, while the interval between the last two is only 1 inch. Ranking in various sports and beauty contests are also only ordinal scales.

An interval scale combines the qualities of the previous scales with equal intervals. The best example would be a centigrade (Celcius) thermometer. The change in heat between 0oC and 10oC is the same as between 10oC and 20oC. But watch out! 20oC is not twice as hot as 10oC! Why? Interval scales havearbitrary zeros (just because we decided to call it zero), rather than absolute (true) zeros. At 0oC water freezes, but that does not mean that there is no heat.

In contrast, the ratio scale has all the qualities of the previous scales plus an absolute (true) zero, as with a Kelvin thermometer. At 0oK, theoretically there isno heat. You have nothing of what you are measuring, therefore the zero is true or absolute.'

SOURCE: http://virgil.azwestern.edu...;


Since 2 + 2 sometimes does not = 4, then it would be wrong to say that you are against the notion that 2 + 2 does not equal 4.

Merrit

Con

To begin, if you follow the link, you can clearly see that Pro plagiarized his whole argument. That being said, let's continue the the rebuttal.

Rebuttal:

Let me remind you of the resolution: "2 + 2 does not equal 4."

However, Pro states: "Only in the last two categories does 2 + 2 = 4."

It seems Pro is contradicting himself with the resolution. He admits that 2 + 2 can equal 4. However, in the resolution, Pro agrees with the statement: "2 + 2 does not equal 4." Pro is trying to manipulate his original stance on the argument.

Pro also states: "Since 2 + 2 sometimes does not = 4, then it would be wrong to say that you are against the notion that 2 + 2 does not equal 4."

Pro's logic is flawed. Once again, he is trying to manipulate his stance on the resolution. However, his manipulation works against him as well. I may very well say: since 2 + 2 sometimes equals 4, the it would be wrong to say that you are for the notion 2 + 2 does not equal 4. Therefore, Pro's argument is invalid.

Argument:
I will prove that 2 + 2 = 4. I

If you have 2 apples, and I have 2 apples, and I give you my 2 apples, you then have 4 apples. There is a physical example. Now let's give you a mathematical example:

1 + 1 = 2
1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4
(1 + 1) + (1 + 1) = 4
(2) + (2) = 4
2 + 2 = 4

Therefore, 2 + 2 equals 4.

Vote Con.

Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Benshapiro 4 years ago
Benshapiro
I think this is the biggest landslide loss in the history of this website. Do I get a hall of shame award?
Posted by donald.keller 4 years ago
donald.keller
Pro would have won if he had set the Resolution to "2 + 2 does not allows equal 4"
Posted by TheEpicMinecrafter 4 years ago
TheEpicMinecrafter
The answer is a heart. ;)
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by InVinoVeritas 4 years ago
InVinoVeritas
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: All points to Con, arguments aside. DDO doesn't stand for plagiarism.
Vote Placed by calculatedr1sk 4 years ago
calculatedr1sk
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: pro plagarized, so it isn't HIS argument; in fact he had no argument. Unacceptable.
Vote Placed by KroneckerDelta 4 years ago
KroneckerDelta
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con pointed out that it's not universally true that 2 + 2 is not equal to 4. Con's easiest way to win is to present a counterexample and they did. I am tempted to give conduct to Con as well because Pro clearly presented a semantic argument (without explanation in Round 1), but anyone accepting must have known it would be some sort of argument of semantics.
Vote Placed by TheEpicMinecrafter 4 years ago
TheEpicMinecrafter
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Benshapiro copied an entire website.
Vote Placed by Sargon 4 years ago
Sargon
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagiarism is bad.
Vote Placed by HeartOfGod 4 years ago
HeartOfGod
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 copied and pasted. Con showed that 2 +2 does in fact equal 4.
Vote Placed by PatriotPerson 4 years ago
PatriotPerson
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: a
Vote Placed by Ameliamk1 4 years ago
Ameliamk1
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro plagarized his whole argument, surrendering all points he may have earned.
Vote Placed by mrsatan 4 years ago
mrsatan
BenshapiroMerritTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro would have had a chance if the resolution were "2+2 does not always equal 4". But, even if it were, on either a nominal scale or an ordinal scale, there is only one "2", and therefore there cannot be a "2+2".