The Instigator
Max.Wallace
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Are you biting the Apple?

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 3 votes the winner is...
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/8/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 598 times Debate No: 69672
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

Max.Wallace

Pro

The Lord warned us about biting the Apple. i. Well have you? devils?
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

I accept.

Some basic definitions before we begin:

Apple -- "a round fruit with red, yellow, or green skin and firm white flesh" (http://www.merriam-webster.com...).

Are -- "Second person singular and plural and first and third person plural present indicative of be." (http://www.merriam-webster.com...)

Biting - "to press down on or cut into (someone or something) with the teeth." (http://www.merriam-webster.com...)

You -- referring to me, the person who accepted this debate


The sole burden of proof to prove that I am, right now (because "are" is a present tense verb), biting "the apple" lies with PRO. If he cannot prove that, you automatically vote for CON by default.

I yield back to PRO for his opening arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
Max.Wallace

Pro

I opened with an argument, and did not ask you to define it. That is the truth. You suppose yourself to be ordained with the duty to define others argument? please continue...........
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

PRO will rightly note that I never once defined his "argument." Rather, I defined the terms in our resolution, and he hasn't contested my definitions, so they extend through.

He has yet to provide a single affrmative argument proving that I am biting the apple, and hasn't contested that he has the burden of proof to prove as much.

He claims that the Lord "warned us to not bite the apple," but provides no evidence of this, or evidence that the Lord exists. Moreover, even the Bible--which is no evidence, and should not be misconstrued as evidence because it's nothing more than a collection of stories that has been translated and re-translated over and over again, and much of which was written thousands of years--did not describe the forbidden fruit as an apple, so this also falls short of reality.

With that, I urge a vote for CON, as PRO has done nothing to advance his BOP.
Debate Round No. 2
Max.Wallace

Pro

I have not spent one penny on Apple, and never will. i am not smart because of the i in Apple. Go chant at the screen fool, like the commercial from 1984. Got it, good, so do I. I lose, so what.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

So, I could start this round by pointing out that none of my arguments, definitions, or burden analysis were even touched, nor did PRO achieve his burden that he never challenged that he had. But, instead, I'd like to quote from my adversary:

"I lose, so what."

I accept PRO's concession. To your audience: Please vote CON, but award PRO conduct.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
I despise my smart phone, and you? Can't walk a mile without it I bet.
Posted by RavenDebater 2 years ago
RavenDebater
You act as if you have not
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by TBR 2 years ago
TBR
Max.WallaceResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: That was like a surprise debate. I had no clue what pro was attempting to debate until the last round. I have no idea who had the more convincing arguments, as as best as I can tell, it unknown.
Vote Placed by Paleophyte 2 years ago
Paleophyte
Max.WallaceResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to make an argument or cite sources.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Max.WallaceResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro basically conceded so Conduct to Con. Pro had bad grammatical skills so those points also go to Con.