The Instigator
abstractoid
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
TheBloodyScot
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

I am correct

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...
TheBloodyScot
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/30/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,225 times Debate No: 26743
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

abstractoid

Pro

I will be arguing the position that I am correct. This debate will consist of 3 rounds
Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Arguing
Round 3: Refuting
TheBloodyScot

Con

I accept your challenge to prove that you are not correct.
Debate Round No. 1
abstractoid

Pro

Thank you for accepting this debate. My argument will start with the brain. I think we can both agree that the human brain works. If something works, it is correct when it does something. I have a brain and I am therefore correct. Also throughout my life I have been asked many questions and have come up with many answers. When I do not know the answer I am incorrect, but now there is no question except, "Am I correct?" I do know the answer to this question and since the answer is I am correct, I would only be incorrect by saying that I am incorrect.
TheBloodyScot

Con

Issac Asimov in The Relativity of Wrong said that it is futile to thing of things of right or wrong, or in this case, correct or incorrect. He said "Wen people thought the Earh was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you thik that thinking that the Earth is spherical i just as wrong as you thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together. The basic trouble, you see, is that people think "right" [correct] and "wrong [incorrect] are absolute; that everything that isn't perfectly and completely right is totally and equally wrong."

What Issac is trying to say is that there is no abslute correct answer. You can only get closer to the answer, but you will never acheive the truth. This is why you are not correct. Being correct is as real as infinity, you can get closer but you will never reach it.
Debate Round No. 2
abstractoid

Pro

Your interpretation of that quote is that "there is no absolute correct answer." I do not believe that this is what he was trying to aver. He was trying to say that you can be partially correct, that you do not have to be completely correct to be "correct." One simple disproof of this is math. 2+2 is always going to equal 4 by the mathematical laws we have created. If I say something that is mostly correct, such as a story that is exaggerated a little, it will be considered mostly correct. Since we are putting forward two possible sides(correct and incorrect) it will have to fall into one of those sides and mostly correct will be put onto the correct side. Saying I am correct can also be said, by this circumstance, I am ,for the most part, correct. You have also not given a single example as to why I am not correct. Only why it is impossible to be correct, which I have just refuted. That is why I am correct.
TheBloodyScot

Con

To start, you have infered that 2+2=4 and that that is "correct." But that is not so because under certain circumstances, 2+2 can equal 5 as seen in this video, proven none other than Stephen Hawking. Fast forward to 3:30 to see the proof.

http://www.nick.com...

Since your were wrong that 2+2=4 is correct, you are not correct.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
abstractoidTheBloodyScotTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro spectacularly failed to uphold his burden of proof. He made a bunch of unwarranted assumptions, so I found Con's line of argumentation more convincing.