Debate Rounds (3)
Thank you for the debate, I humbly and most graciously accept your challenge. Not sure if this is a joke debate, but let the joke be on thee.
I argue that from the standpoint of science, there is no such thing as 'American Millenials.' From the point of view of science, there is no evidence for the concept known as 'American', or the concept known as 'Millenial.' One cannot demonstrate through empirical evidence that either of these concepts exist.
These two concepts are nothing more than social constructs, with no real basis in the physical or metaphysical world. They are useful fictions, same as language is. Words in our languages, whether spoken or written, do not have intrinsic meaning. We simply artificially assign them meaning because it is useful for us. I argue that in the same way language is a useful fiction, so is the concept of being 'American' or 'Millenial.' Therefore, if these concepts are nothing more than useful fictions, there cannot be such a thing in realy as an 'American Millenial.'
The concept of American does not exist. For this concept to exist, two things must be true:
First, the term 'American' implies that there is a geographical piece of land which has the inherent quality of being 'American'. Land has no such quality. A certain piece of land composed of rock, soil, water, etc, has no intrinsic name. We can call it whatever we want, and indeed, throughout history, the borders of areas of land have always shifted. What is called 'America' today was called something else centuries ago. Therefore, the first term is false. As there is no evidence that certain pieces of land are intrinsically named something, therefore, no piece of land is intrinsically 'America.'
Second, the term implies that, assuming that the geographical piece of land has some intrisnic name (which is false, as stated above), that land imparts such a label onto the human being that walks on it. There is no evidence of this either. Indeed, if a person walks on many different pieces of land that have intrinsic names of states, such as Florida, Georgia, and Alabama, does that person somehow intrinsically become a Floridian, Georgian, and an Alabamian at the same time? There is no evidence that the land imparts such characteristics onto any person. Therefore, no person is intrinsically an 'American.'
The concept of Millenial does not exist. For this concept to exist, two things must be true:
First, the term 'Millenial' implies that time has certain intrinsic labels. Same as for geography, no instant of time has any intrinsic label. No point in time is officially January 1, 2001. This is yet another arbitrary social construct with no basis in the physical or metaphysical realities. Therefore, no period of time is a 'new millenium'.
Second, time, same as geography, does not impart it's intrinsic name onto a person who exists during its time frame. Because a person lives in a certain period of time that we have arbitrarily labeled 'the new millenium' does not result in that time period imparting some intrinsic metaphysical quality onto that person who exists at that time. Since there is no evidence to support such a quality being imparted, it must be rejected, or we must remain agnostic about it.
Conclusion: My argument is, therefore, that since the concepts of 'American' and 'Millenial' are arbitrary social constructs describing geography and time, rather than actual intrinsic features of either of these concepts, they are nothing but a useful fiction. Therefore, since such concepts don't exist except as a useful fiction, no person can have these qualities as an intrinsic feature of themselves except as some arbitrary useful fiction that we assign to them.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.