The Instigator
KingofEverything
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
vi_spex
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Does non-existence exist?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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 1 vote the winner is...
KingofEverything
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/19/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 724 times Debate No: 81196
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (22)
Votes (1)

 

KingofEverything

Pro

I believe that non-existence indeed exists.
vi_spex

Con

is a rock not a rock?
Debate Round No. 1
KingofEverything

Pro

Non-existence is the absence of existence.

The space in between a cup inside a vacuum is existent, because without it, there would be no space. Nothing is space, which is needed for the nothing to exist, and it serves a role, so it is something.
vi_spex

Con

so if existence ceases to exist non existence can exist?

there is air in the cup, air is something
Debate Round No. 2
KingofEverything

Pro

I said that the cup is in a VACUUM. So there is no air.
vi_spex

Con

vacuum only extends the air that is present in the room
Debate Round No. 3
KingofEverything

Pro

But the air is still not in the cup. And you're saying that this "vacuum" is doing something, meaning it has a role, and if you have a role, surely you are something, because if it's nothing and only nothing, it can't have a role.
vi_spex

Con

there is air in the cup.. or some other form of matter

the vacuum effects the cup
Debate Round No. 4
KingofEverything

Pro

I created the scenario, so you don't get to choose the situation. There is no air in the cup.

If the vacuum affects the cup, it has a role, and thus it's something. I rest my case.
vi_spex

Con

you dont create reality...
Debate Round No. 5
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: LandonWalsh// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. I wish this debate didnt exist.

[*Reason for removal*] This is not an RFD. This is a personal opinion, and a complete vote bomb.
************************************************************************
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
information is antimatter, matter is true
Posted by m8 1 year ago
m8
Yeah, you don't. Light isn't antimatter.
Posted by PowerPikachu21 1 year ago
PowerPikachu21
matter = can be interacted with (touched, smelt, heard) light can't be felt therefore it isn't matter. can be seen is not matter. (Actually, what IS light exactly? It's what is known as "anti-matter", but we can see it... I don't get it)
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
space=matter

air=gas
Posted by PowerPikachu21 1 year ago
PowerPikachu21
"vacuum only extends the air that is present in the room" I think he's talking about Outer Space. ("The vacuum of space") There is no air in space.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
physical experience is source confirmation, as truth is personal experience, and future shows what even a blind man can see
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
there has to be existence for the ide of non existence to exist
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
creation presupposes creator

non existence by default does not exist
Posted by ZBestDebater 1 year ago
ZBestDebater
Furyan5 said, "Non existence exists until something that exists takes its place. A hole exists, till you fill it. Before the big bang, nothing existed. Nothing could not exist, if non existence couldn't exist." Nothing existed before the Big Bang?

Ignorant statement alert.

The Big Bang (According to Science) was the expansion of the already existing, small Universe. Not it's creation.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
KingofEverythingvi_spexTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro affirmed the resolution by arguing the specific scenario of a cup within a vacuum. Con's response just didn't appear to engage with it, asserting that there must be something existing in the cup without explaining what that something is or why it's present in a vacuum. Lacking that, Pro's argument goes unchallenged, and as such wins him the debate.