The Instigator
Illegalcombatant
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Brainmaster
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

I 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...
Illegalcombatant
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 577 times Debate No: 17001
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Illegalcombatant

Pro

Definitions

I = The instigator of this debate, known as Illegalcombatant on DDO.

Exist = To have actual being. http://dictionary.reference.com......

1) Opening Arguments

I am curious if anyone will argue against this. Last time I debated on this my opponent did not finish. Anyway here is my opening argument.........

1) Only something that exists can question its own existence
2) I am questioning my own existence
3) Therefore I exist

"I think therefore I am"

I look forward to Cons response.
Brainmaster

Con

Thanks for the debate Illegalcombatant.

Rebuttal. Actually anything can question its existence, or at least pretend to. Just because my opponent claims he exists does not mean he actually exists. My opponent could simply be an AI program debating me, claiming it exists.

I present the Uncertainty Theory, which states that if something cannot be proven, it cannot exist.

Back to you, Con.
Debate Round No. 1
Illegalcombatant

Pro

I thank Con for their reply.

The Uncertainty theory

Con says "Uncertainty Theory, which states that if something cannot be proven, it cannot exist. "

The uncertainty theory is self refuting, seeing it cannot be proven, by its own rule it cannot exist.

1) Only something that exists can question its own existence

Con says "Just because my opponent claims he exists does not mean he actually exists."

Non existent things can't question existence, thus you need to exist in order to question existence.

2) I am questioning my own existence

Even if I was a computer pretending to be human, I would still have to be a computer and thus exist in the first place. The argument doesn't make any claims about what "type" of existence I has, only that I exists.

3) Therefore I exist

The conclusion logically follows.

Vote Pro.

I thank Con for accepting this debate.

Brainmaster

Con

Thanks for the debate Illegalcombatant.

R1. Actually, it's perfectly possible that we can question existence without existing. For all we know, we live in a simulated reality where we are our souls..


R2. See R1.


R3. You mat exist but it is unverifiable.

Vote con
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
IllegalcombatantBrainmasterTied
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: Not a lot of argument from Pro, but even less from Con. Con, try Decartes as a source to argue existence.