The Instigator
ArgumentsBelieveM8
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
madcusbad17
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Can one be 100% confident in completing an act? if there is .00000001% risk?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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: Select Winner
Started: 11/7/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 417 times Debate No: 82209
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

ArgumentsBelieveM8

Pro

So basically, my friends and I are having a serious but small debate. It is concerning that if there is risk involved in a specific act, then one cannot be 100% confident in completing the act. I stated that this was false, that even if there is 99% risk involved, one can still be 100% confident that he or she can complete the said act. My example was a bridge that was over a deep cliff with alligators at the bottom. I said that even though there is the possibility that one could fall off the bridge into the pit of alligators, one could be 100% confident in crossing that bridge successfully. I said this because being 100% confident is based on one's ability to believe in one's self. As a result, this is why I believe that one can be 100% confident even if there is .000000000000001% risk
madcusbad17

Con

To be 100% confident in your ability to cross the bridge, you must be sure that there is nothing in your way that can stop you. Unless this bridge gives you a 100% success rate of crossing it (which is impossible because you mentioned there is still a risk in crossing the bridge) you can't be sure that you will cross it. You can be 99.99999999999% sure that you will cross it successfully, but your mind still understands that there is still a risk, a small one albeit. You cannot fully convince yourself that you will cross that bridge because you know internally that there is still a risk. If one believes a risk is present (which you state in the question is true), then one cannot be sure of completing the act successfully. To understand a risk is to take it into consideration with your actions.
Debate Round No. 1
ArgumentsBelieveM8

Pro

I completely disagree with madcusbad17. Lets take a different bridge for example. This bridge is very short, and is made of brand new wood. The drop from the bridge to the ground is 1 ft, and the only fault in the bridge is that the gap between the middle piece of wood and the one to the right of it is .5ft. However, the structure is still strong. So according to madcusbad17, there is a potential risk, and in this case, its falling in a gap that is only half a foot long. So there is the RISK of putting your foot in the gap and falling down .5ft, but then are you telling me that one could not be 100% confident in being able to cross that bridge just because of a gap that is .5ft wide? Even if the risk in that case is 1% because of the gap, one can assume, with 100% confidence that, even though there is a .5ft gap, there is no way this can stop him or her from crossing the bridge. Even if there are many other, more dangerous, variables in the way.
madcusbad17

Con

madcusbad17 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by JamesandGains953 1 year ago
JamesandGains953
I can see where madcusbad17 is coming from, however, I do not agree with him, in fact, I believe that ArgumentsBelieveM8 and AlexIbarra are definitely correct. I support Alex's idea that Confidence and risk are two independent ideas. I think the same. I feel that, in terms of the bridge example, that even if there were a million alligators, and that the bridge would collapse under the slightest placement of pressure, one could still be 100% confident that he or she could cross it correctly. madcusbad17 does make some good points, however, I still believe that "Pro" side is correct.
Posted by Chrislynn4life 1 year ago
Chrislynn4life
To be perfectly honest, ArgumentsBelieveM8 gives off a fairly arrogant and delusional vibe with this stance on certainty. Really you must be either extremely stupid or extremely hubristic. Whoever you are ArgumentsBelieveM8, you have probably failed at least once where you where sure you were going to succeed. This whole logic of being a hundred percent certain in doing something even though there is 99% risk involved is faulted to the very core. Humans are naturally a thoughtful species, (I realise this may be a big assumption in the case of this "ArgumentsBelieveM8" fellow, but bear with me), we can never be truly certain about anything in life because we know how unpredictable life is. Anything could happen as you cross that bridge, and unless you are so oblivious to the world around, you know grasp this harsh reality. Knowing that anything to could happen most definitely has a negative impact on your certainty. Having said that, the probability of potential events also plays its part. Lighting could strike as you crossed that bridge and send you tumbling down, this is highly unlikely so your certainty probably only drops down to 99.999999% but there is that change because you never truly know. Now if you see that the bridge joints are deteriorated and barely held together you certainty percentage probably drops down to around 20 percent.

All in all "ArgumentsBelieveM8" seems like an absolute imbecile, take no personal offence though mate we can't all be intelligent now can we?
Posted by AlexIbarra 1 year ago
AlexIbarra
I believe that ArgumentsBelieveM8 is correct. I also think that 100% or 99% risk does not mean that a person can't be 100% confident. The fact is that confidence and risk are two independent ideas, and that being confident does not imply that there is risk, and that a lot of potential risk does not imply 0 confidence. Confidence has to do with one's mental state, and not the risk present in a situation. Let's take a person with a gun and another with a knife for example, they are fighting each other. The person with the gun is 100% confident he can kill the guy with the knife because he can shoot from anywhere, far from melee distance. However, there is still the risk that the person with the knife throws it, quickly, at the person with the gun. So even though there is that risk, the person with the gun can still be 100% confident that he can win the battle. ArgumentsBelieveM8 is correct
Posted by Koodle0101 1 year ago
Koodle0101
It's both a yes and/or no answer depending on how you view the question. If there is any risk of failing at all you can never be 100% successful, meaning if there are an infinite number of people crossing this bridge, at some point one person will fall. However, in your MIND you can totally be 100% sure of yourself. They're actually two different things. You can be 100% confident that you will make, but whether you will or not will never be 100%. Every single person crossing that bridge can be 100% sure they'll make it, without a single ounce of doubt! Yet at some point someone will fall.
No votes have been placed for this debate.