All Big Issues
The Instigator
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

# An actual infinite is possible and does exist.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 1/28/2014 Category: Philosophy Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 1,083 times Debate No: 44762
Debate Rounds (4)

29 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by i-Immaterial 3 years ago
Thanks for participating horisam. I will host a debate like this again hopefully. If horisam would like to continue the discussion here in the comments, he is welcome to.
Posted by horisam 3 years ago
It is an interesting debate. I hope I argued my side clearly. My only problem with the debate is that words like "infinity", "fact", "true" and "abstract" don't mean anything clear. I would advise anyone who tries this debate again to clearly define words like those. The argument presented below in the comments "view to be all rational numbers. or into a larger subset, complex numbers,etc. it is possible to find an infinite amount of infinite sets by looking at the large collection of infintisimally small numbers between any two boundaries. i.e. 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, 0.0001, etc." was the argument I thought you would use.
Posted by brepar 3 years ago
ah, k.
interesting idea for a debate though, far better than most I've seen.
Posted by i-Immaterial 3 years ago
Increments are potentially infinite. Infinite sets are more of the factual sense of infinite, which is what I was arguing for.
Posted by brepar 3 years ago
again, i find myself disagreeing, considering only natural numbers it would be incredibly hard to take an infinity.
however, expanding your view to be all rational numbers. or into a larger subset, complex numbers,etc. it is possible to find an infinite amount of infinite sets by looking at the large collection of infintisimally small numbers between any two boundaries. i.e. 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, 0.0001, etc.
Posted by i-Immaterial 3 years ago
Typo correction/

*number 9's are there in sets that are potentially infinite*

*number infinities are there for every set (a potentially infinite number of sets) starting with the first being 1-infinity*
Posted by i-Immaterial 3 years ago
You are failing to see the distinction between a symbol and a description. If someone takes a picture of me, then they have taken a symbol composed of ink and paper. However, the ink and paper are not descriptions. It is the color of my skin, shirt, and hair that describe me. It is the straightness of my hair, the position I am standing in that describes me. The picture as a whole is just a symbol. So you can see the absurdity of painting the color red, red. Red is the descriptor. It is the thing that colors, not the thing that is colored.

As for numbers, let me try to describe it another way. How many number nine are there in a set that is potentially infinite starting with 1-9? In every case, the answer would be one. Now what if I asked you how many number infinity are there in a potentially infinite set starting from 1-infinity. Well now you run into a problem. Infinity is not a number, and an infinite set does not exist. And there can't be a potentially infinite number of sets after the set 1-infinity.

Hope that helps.
Posted by brepar 3 years ago
they are still descriptive, if i asked you to describe the room you were in would you not use some combination of words, numbers and pictures?
Posted by i-Immaterial 3 years ago
24,23,55,90 are just symbols. These are only potentially infinite. And no, pictures and words are not descriptive lol. They're only symbolic.
Posted by brepar 3 years ago
Infinity is not a number, it is a theory related to the possibility of an endless amount of something.

Words are descriptors we can still count them
24,23,55,90
There are 4 numbers in the row above, i have counted numbers with numbers and it has in no way been incorrect.

You may as well say that you cannot paint a picture of a painting or describe a word using other words. So id the dictionary wrong?
No votes have been placed for this debate.