The Instigator
WilliamGaspar54
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
SkyLeach
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Are Latin Curses Real?

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 Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/15/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 318 times Debate No: 89744
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

WilliamGaspar54

Pro

I propose that Latin curses are very much real. There's substantial evidence that proves this, all throughout history, curses are mentioned. They are dismissed as "coincidence" or "bad luck", but they are real
SkyLeach

Con

I welcome the evidence, although I insist upon no movement of the goalposts. Your premise and the question at large put forward that curses are 'real', and as such I demand that the definition of reality be constrained to the definitions defined by the philosophies of science and mathematics.

Therefore 'reality' must be constrained to physical evidence that can be observed and measured within laboratory conditions or with control groups. This is required due to the actions of James Randi during his 'Project Alpha' wherein he showed that the human mind is susceptible to perceptual deception and even suggestion. Without a controlled environment, eliminating even a fraction of the alternate explanations becomes impossible and determining cause is a requirement of establishing origin of effect. An unbroken Markov chain of causation must be established in order to establish a physics definition of substantive reality.
Debate Round No. 1
WilliamGaspar54

Pro

WilliamGaspar54 forfeited this round.
SkyLeach

Con

I yield more time to my opponent to present the evidence required and requested.
Debate Round No. 2
WilliamGaspar54

Pro

WilliamGaspar54 forfeited this round.
SkyLeach

Con

and in conclusion I conclude that my opponent gave up
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by SkyLeach 1 year ago
SkyLeach
Ah, I didn't realize that was required for voting. I did it early on.
Posted by Kyle_the_Heretic 1 year ago
Kyle_the_Heretic
Interesting. This is from the FAQ:

In order to vote, we require all members to complete at least 3 debates and verify their account via their mobile phone. This is done to protect the integrity of the debates by ensuring that each vote belongs to a single unique individual. Once you successfully complete 3 debates and confirm your cell phone number, you will have complete access to the voting features. Additionally, members are not allowed to vote on their own debates.
Posted by SkyLeach 1 year ago
SkyLeach
I don't need a cellphone to vote? I had to participate in debates first, but after that no problem.
Posted by Kyle_the_Heretic 1 year ago
Kyle_the_Heretic
Voters are lazy. I have a few debates that have not, or are not receiving votes either. I cannot vote, because apparently a cell phone is required, and I do not own one. Otherwise, you would have received my vote.
Posted by SkyLeach 1 year ago
SkyLeach
can't believe this tied. even a cursory view by a voter would have established the default win
Posted by SkyLeach 1 year ago
SkyLeach
*sigh*
Posted by Kyle_the_Heretic 1 year ago
Kyle_the_Heretic
After reading the arguments in round 1, I predict con will be shooting fish in a barrel.
No votes have been placed for this debate.