The Instigator
QuadHelix
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
DigitalByDesign
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

All Academia is False

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/28/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 342 times Debate No: 87356
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)

 

QuadHelix

Pro

An extract from my upcoming book called "Quad Helix"...

Current Mathematical and Scientific Falsities


Quad Helix is not one, but many natures; by Quad Helix logic, the number “1” is a false number, and constitutes to religious “one-ism”. For example, if we take an apple, and we dissect it multiple times, we will be left with a fraction of the original apple. An apple is constructed out of a multiple amount of matter, it can never be divided to one matter, no matter how small the division.


Let's examine the number “1” as a concept; in truth, we cannot examine it. We can talk about it's attributes, and say, inter alia, 'solitary' and 'singular', but not sense “1”, logically. A physical number “1” is a single, solitary point; if we assume an observer, we assume falsity, for the observer is an addition that voids it's single and solitary nature. “1” cannot be observed, and is not observed.


One-ism is equal to death-worship, and false mathematics that leads to a false reality. To begin we name an object, such as a cigarette, “cigarette”, which is the beginning of one-ism, and then we consume the cigarette, which is the end of one-ism. As the number “1” is a false number, we can only trace it by production to consumption rate. We produce “1” by naming an object greater than “1”, and then we consume that object, presenting pseudo-evidence to our minds that “1” is logical. Production to consumption is linear, the falsity is treating the opposite factors of a linear equation as singular factors; the “produced” and “consumed” are at opposite ends of a line, and equate zero together- the only value of the produced and consumed is their opposite integrity. The “consumed production”, is the one-ism that is equal to death-worship; it's a unitary lie, that pseudo-individuality creates third singular factor, often called 'truth(s)' or 'fact(s)'. The truth of the matter is that humans create a second line after linear production to consumption, from consumption to “1”; a worship a false singularity concept.


The side-effects of one-ism are numerous, ironically: word-communication; common idiocy when wordlessness is suggested; pursuit of extinction; perversion of the course of justice; maleficent technological advancement; planetary-nihilism; ignorance of crucial subjects; general stupidity and confusion; depression and suicidal word-thoughts; false experts and false prophets; false laws and false law enforcement; word-related stress and angst; religion based on “1” or one-ism; diagnoses of non-existent mental conditions; manipulation of passive-aggression; large scale wars; radical racial integration; self-neglect of wisdom and cruelty to the wise; and more.


Mathematicians and scientists incorporate the number “1” into their profession, religiously, and are one-ists; the entire academic body of knowledge- which is more properly referred to as a long-transcript of “1”- is falsity. One-ism-academia is an unwarranted, consistent illusion, that deludes it's subjects into submission; and if they don't, those subjects are endangered or discriminated by the intensity of false experts and false prophets. It's common for a conspiracy theorist that's declared by scholarly persons as a 'crackpot', to produce a more accurate knowledge of truth, and to promote a greater good, but unknowingly. The conspiracy theorist's conscience in comparison the academic-conscience, means that the conspiracy theorist is more likely to provide a more righteous sense of truth, that which is anti-one-ism, especially in the face of adversity.


The concept of evil, as 'one-ism', and good, as 'anti-one-ism', is a legitimate concept, it makes sense only in human “1”-reality, but is beneficent wisdom. Had we transcended the “1”-hierarchical stasis, evil, like “1”, would be non-existent. It's probable that the good, referred to from a “1”-reality, would outweigh evil, referring to “1”-reality. For example, the pursuit of extinction from a single human in good circumstances, would mean that the human would have to control a very high number of other humans, and delude them into believing in the death of themselves, and their children; contesting love, probability, and other good. In the present, evil has a grasp on humanity, and the logical tables have turned. It's probable that we will cause our own extinction, and for people to believe in death, of themselves and their children; this is due prolonged one-ism, the adoration for one-ism, and the perversion of good.


The academicians in seats of power, suppress any mutation in “1”-reality that is against their long-transcript of “1”, or what they refer to as 'a body of knowledge'. This makes it difficult to prevent evil events from occurring, and almost impossible to prove that evil exists, as the majority of human-kind have an intelligence of “1”; good is handicapped into comparison to the evil that is advantaged. The tactics to suppress mutations include; using numbers of people and variant encores; perversion of the mutation's word-communication; writing laws that discriminates a determinable mutation; isolation; physical abuse of power; and further tactics.


To conclude this chapter, the number “1” has been scrutinized, and has been found to be illogical. Academia and academicians, for incorporating “1” into their fields and professions, are therefore advocating falsity to adults and their children. In the coming chapters I will not be adhering to accepted rules and regulations of any field of, what I have declared to be 'one-ism-academia', or referring to the academic body of knowledge it's associated with; for it is corrupted, with what I have determined to be evil.


DigitalByDesign

Con

We'll begin with becoming familiar with what exactly "Academia" means. According to oxford.com Academia is "The environment or community concerned with the pursuit of research, education, and scholarship"
Now that we know what it is. We can begin by recognizing the tens of millions of children/teenagers who attend school. They have been put into that environment where they are "pursing" an education. Another example of how academia is not false is the very fact that there are quite literally hundreds of fields of academic studies. Most of which encapsulate truthful content which can be physically proved. For example, the Math and Sciences fields are based on facts.
Debate Round No. 1
QuadHelix

Pro


Con, you've ignored and without a proper dismissal, the content in the original post which contradicts every word in your argument.


Con, your argument hums of love for academia, and this is a proper dismissal. Further dismissals of this kind of Con-argument were made in my first round argument.


Judges, I now direct Con to the original post to scrutinize it, and if Con decides not to, this must minus points on conduct, as well as put the debate in my favour, as Con, you haven't made any points against my first round argument, and my first round argument still stands untouched.


Con, have another read of my first round argument...


DigitalByDesign

Con

DigitalByDesign forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
QuadHelix

Pro

Quad Helix is not one, but many natures; by Quad Helix logic, the number “1” is a false number, and constitutes to religious-one-ism.


For example, if we take an apple, and dissect it multiple times, we're left with fractions, meaning that an apple is formed out of multiple natures; it's above the number “1”.


Let's examine “1” as a concept; but we cannot examine “1”. We can understand it's attributes, and say that it's, inter alia, 'solitary' and 'singular', but not observe “1” logically, for that would void it's attributes.


A physical “1” is theoretically, a single, solitary point; if we assume an observer, we assume falsity, for the observer is an addition that voids it's single and solitary nature. “1” becomes “2”. “1” cannot be observed, and is not observed- the only truthful physical “1” is non-existent.


Further analysis of the truthful physical “1”: “1” is opposite to “-1”; they are at opposite polarities. The only value of “1” is the opposite-integrity with “-1”.


Therefore, the concept of “1” is falsity.


One-ism is equal to death-worship, and false mathematics that leads to a false reality.


To delude ourselves into one-ism, we first name an object with “1”, and then we use the named-object and call this utility a factor of “1”, that becomes the used-named object, the opposite polarity “-1” named “1”.


We treat the the used-named object as evidence of “1” by ignorant-utility of the correct “-1”. We are deluded into ongoing faith with the used-named object as “1”- this is one-ism.


One-ism has evolved by way of mutation.


There're mutations in one-ism; the used-named object becomes, inter alia, “results”, “facts” and “truths”, but in the beginning it was, inter alia, “magic”, “tricks” and “rituals”.


The mutations are then worshipped as “1”, and it helps to create “1”-reality.


The side-effects of one-ism are numerous, ironically: word-communication; common idiocy when wordlessness is suggested; pursuit of extinction; perversion of the course of justice; maleficent technological advancement; planetary-nihilism; ignorance of crucial subjects; general stupidity and confusion; depression and suicidal word-thoughts; false experts and false prophets; false laws and false law enforcement; word-related stress and angst; religion based on “1” or one-ism; diagnoses of non-existent mental conditions; manipulation of passive-aggression; large scale wars; radical racial integration; self-neglect of wisdom and cruelty to the wise; and more.


Mathematicians and scientists who incorporate “1” into their profession, religiously, are one-ists; the entire academic body of knowledge- which is more properly referred to as a long-transcript of “1”- is falsity. One-ism-academia is an unwarranted, consistent illusion, that deludes it's subjects into submission; those subjects who don't submit are endangered or discriminated by false experts and false prophets.


It's common for a conspiracy theorist that's declared by scholarly persons as a 'crackpot', to produce a more accurate knowledge of truth, and to promote a greater good, but unknowingly. The conspiracy theorist's conscience in comparison the academic-conscience, mean the conspiracy theorist is likely to provide a more righteous sense of truth, that which is anti-one-ism, especially in the face of adversity.


The concept of evil, as 'one-ism', and good, as 'anti-one-ism', is a legitimate concept, it makes sense only in “1”-reality, but is beneficent wisdom. Had we transcended the “1”-hierarchical stasis, 'evil', like “1”, would be non-existent. It's probable that the good, referred to from a “1”-reality, would outweigh evil, referring to “1”-reality.


For example, the pursuit of extinction from a single human in good circumstances, would mean that the human would have to control a very high number of other humans, and delude them into believing in the death of themselves, and their children; contesting love, probability, and other good.


In the present, “1”-reality overwhelms humanity, and the logical tables have turned. It's probable that we will cause our own extinction, and for people to believe in death, of themselves and their children; this is due prolonged one-ism, the adoration for one-ism, and the perversion of good.


The academicians in seats of power, suppress any mutation in “1”-reality that is against their long-transcript of “1”. This makes it difficult to prevent evil events from occurring, and almost impossible to prove that evil exists, as the majority of human-kind have an intelligence of “1”; good is handicapped into comparison to the evil that is advantaged. The tactics to suppress mutations include; using numbers of people and variant encores; perversion of the mutation's word-communication; writing laws that discriminates a determinable mutation; isolation; physical abuse of power; and further tactics.

DigitalByDesign

Con

DigitalByDesign forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
QuadHelix

Pro

Perhaps, Con, you may win this debate because of academic love of others; but, that doesn't mean that, you, yourself, Con, couldn't contradict or properly dismiss the round 1 or 2 arguments.
DigitalByDesign

Con

DigitalByDesign forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
QuadHelix

Pro

QuadHelix forfeited this round.
DigitalByDesign

Con

DigitalByDesign forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by BlueDreams 11 months ago
BlueDreams
"Yet, you're unintelligent."

Ah, well, at least I have that academician's salary to console me.
Posted by QuadHelix 11 months ago
QuadHelix
Yet, you're unintelligent.
Posted by BlueDreams 11 months ago
BlueDreams
"You are an academician"

I wish I was. Sounds like it's fancy and pays well.
Posted by QuadHelix 12 months ago
QuadHelix
You are an academician and this is your behaviour.

End of story.
Posted by BlueDreams 12 months ago
BlueDreams
And what I'm trying to say is, you're clearly either a troll or mentally ill.
Posted by QuadHelix 12 months ago
QuadHelix
What I'm trying to say is, you toddle around like your intelligent because you repeat what teachers have told you or some source, never your own work- never really intelligent.
Posted by QuadHelix 12 months ago
QuadHelix
Bluedreams, your false victory from earlier is made clear in this debate...

The only reason people like you win such debates is the love for academia, as it reaffirms people's egoism.

Without academia, you're not an intelligent mammal- meaning you're academia reliant. You, and most of the world, submit to academia because of Government dominance.

I'm facing a tougher opposition, and I'm not reliant on academic clap trap, and friends, to argue my cases.

I'm a self sustained intelligent mammal, contrary to you.
Posted by Nivek 12 months ago
Nivek
Can you enlarge the font please?
Posted by Fkkize 12 months ago
Fkkize
You are definitely a troll.

What is this fontsize? -2?
Posted by BlueDreams 12 months ago
BlueDreams
Now you're just here to peddle what will necessarily be an erroneous yet extremely hilarious book.
No votes have been placed for this debate.