The Instigator
AEQUITAS
Pro (for)
Losing
27 Points
The Contender
Bricheze
Con (against)
Winning
35 Points

Absolute Truth

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/26/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,678 times Debate No: 6344
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (19)
Votes (12)

 

AEQUITAS

Pro

I believe that there is absolute truth. I believe that the person who says "there are no absolute truths," is wrong. Con's job will be to try and prove that there are no absolute truths. Consequently, if there are absolute truths then the person who says "what's true for you may not be true for me," is obviously wrong because there are absolute truths. That's it. Plain and simple.
Bricheze

Con

Are then any absolute truths. No.
1. We aren't certain of anything (Common beliefs, laws, etc. are proved wrong every day)
2. People have different takes on everything (what you think is the color blue, I think is the color navy)
3. Any example can have a different truth, so there is no absolute truth

I'm now asking my opponent to bring forth an example that can not be thought of with more then one truth.
Debate Round No. 1
AEQUITAS

Pro

My next argument is simply a question. Are you absolutely sure that it is absolutely TRUE that there are no absolute truths?
Bricheze

Con

I'd hardly call it fair for you to say that the only absolute truth is their are no absolute truths. As in the original argument you didn't ask me to do that. Your just making up a debate that is impossible for con to win, so you can get votes. I like good philosophical debates where no one automatically loses and it is impossible for one side to win. This debate is pointless, I hope you enjoy your set-up win, one you really did not deserve.
Debate Round No. 2
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by beem0r 8 years ago
beem0r
Aye, PRO might not have given you a good reason to vote PRO, but CON did, at least in my opinion. Nothing will make me vote against a person faster than explicitly conceding the debate.

Of course, that would be if I had a vote, which I don't. +1 virtual votes for PRO. I'd givethe conduct points to CON, aguments to PRO, sources to neither, tie for grammar/spelling - would be 3 points PRO, 1 point CON.
Posted by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
I'm voting for CON for a few reasons:

1) She was really the only one to make an argument.
2) PRO didn't give me enough to affirm the resolution. Thus, in the end of the debate, I am left with little to nothing to base it off of. Therefore, I don't really know if there are absolute truths, thus I voted CON.
Posted by beem0r 8 years ago
beem0r
CON conceded to PRO's argument.
Even so, CON's argument was ridiculously weak. He implied something that is false by definition - that "there are no absolute truths" is an absolute truth. The law of non-contradiction shows that that statement is false.

Considering PRO didn't even make an argument, he just asked CON a question, and CON conceded and made PRO's argument for him, I would have to vote for PRO. While he may have provided no real arguments for his side, getting a score of 0 from me, at least he didn't feed his opponent arguments and concede to them all at the same time, which would be a negative score.
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
I am ashamed at my fellow cleaners.

Semantic arguments should hold no value. PRO blatantly and maliciously avoided the real issue at hand, using a hyper-simplistic mean to win the debate.

After much contemplation, I feel the need to switch my argument vote to CON. PRO did not meet the burden of proof (he tried to avoid it!) while at least CON tried to put forth some real arguments.
Posted by burningpuppies101 8 years ago
burningpuppies101
Conduct: Tie. Pro should not have made this debate, and con should not have been so rude after he realized he was trapped.
S/G: Tie. Didn't see any blatant errors, and I'm not about to psycoanalyze the 2 players grammar.
Arguments: Pro. His argument is valid, as underhanded as it is.
Sources: Tie. None were used.

Conclusion: Pro was very cruel to start this debate, as this debate is self defeating. But, Con has to accept some responsibility, as Con did accept the debate in the first place. Its not Pro's fault Con didn't pay attention.

~bp101
Posted by intj22 8 years ago
intj22
I too DISagree that this debate was unfair. It was a valid challenge to show how a position is self-refuting. Not only should Bricheze have been aware of this but her defense that "the only absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth" (AT) only underscores how valid this debate is, because that too is wrong. I can put forth the proposition "bricheze's AT statement is absolutely true" and it would be absolutely true because it merely affirms an absolutely truth, so now we have two propositions that are absolutely true... and so forth. This was a valid challenge.
Posted by Bricheze 8 years ago
Bricheze
Oh shutup, I read it, I just didn't understand until after I read the comments that it was impossible for one side to win. When you make a debate, where it is IMPOSSIBLE for a side to win, that is unfair. We should have excluded the only 'absolute truth' is that their are no absolute truths, thing, because it simply made it completely unfair.
Posted by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
If you accepted the debate without reading it, complaining about it still shows poor conduct. No matter how you slice it, in my opinion, accepting the debate voids your right to complain about it.
Posted by Bricheze 8 years ago
Bricheze
I didn't realize it was impossible to win until after I accepted it. No 'impossible' debates should ever be debated. It simply isn't fair.
Posted by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
I disagree with the notion that this debate is unfair. If it was so blatantly one sided, then why did Con accept it? Looking at her first round, she clearly believes that there is no certainty, an agnostic position. Pro simply showed, in one sentence, how relative truth is self-refuting. That to be true, it must be false, therefore it is false. I give convincing argument to Pro. I also give conduct to Pro because Con accepted the debate then complained about it.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by KyleLumsden 8 years ago
KyleLumsden
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by AEQUITAS 8 years ago
AEQUITAS
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Bricheze 8 years ago
Bricheze
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Rawlsfulcopter 8 years ago
Rawlsfulcopter
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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 
Vote Placed by burningpuppies101 8 years ago
burningpuppies101
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by intj22 8 years ago
intj22
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by mecap 8 years ago
mecap
AEQUITASBrichezeTied
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