I am the soul imaginor of all things.
Debate Rounds (3)
if you are God, then why did you invent this world?
If you are God for what reason do you have for a body (even a single celled one)?
do others exist as gods as you?
do I exist?
What is my role in the grander scheme of things?
Do you work?
Why did you create such a world in your mind?
I hate you! If I am of your mind does this mean you hate yourself? If not then why do you allow
for your creations to hate its creator?
If a man were to stab you would you bleed?
can you die?
Is your soul existence to create a world in your mind?
I did not say I was god the meaning of the word soul as I stated was to show the absoluteness of just one so I think its supposed to be spelled sole?
The body is the one I started out with with another person creating me in all a giant paradox.
A god as you say would have to imply that the theory of christianity is real.
Not at the moment when I create you into my own eyes that is when you truly exist.
Your role is to argue with me.
To make up for my meager existence.
No just a part of my imagination was created to hate me. (you)
To give the illusion of free will.
I would theoretically in my imagination I would.
No I would wake up in my other existence and start the world anew.
No my soul existence is to float through space I use this world as a past time.
FALLACY: you mentioned that you were a single cell ed organism so how do you have eyes? If you don't have eyes how do you understand what it is like to see?
FALLACY:how do you know of your other "lives?" What do you have to be so confident of your other existence?
FALLACY:how do you know of where you roam if you have no sight?
Cogito ergo sum: the fact that you are making me argue my existence proves my existence (Descartes)
What image do you have to create me in with nopoint of reference (sight)
Second Fallacy- Seeing is a sense that my mind created seeing isn't an understanding its the projections of the creations of my mind.
Third Fallacy- The creation of this life allowed me to retain my memories of my true existence and what would happen if I died although all other memories are suppressed by my previous imagined deaths.
Fourth Fallacy- I do not have sight because it is a creation of my mind.
No it does not because it argues the point that I am subconsciously creating this argument. I only do not know the outcome of the vote because if I knew everything that was going to happen then this life would be no more enjoyable than my last.
There is no image until my mind puts your particles together in my mind while you come to exist by my mind in front of me. If I knew what everyone looked like and what they were going to do it would be boring in this life just as it was in my last.
the instigator has placed himself in a metaphorical "brain in a vat" which has created everything. the fact
"he" cannot see imposes the question of "if he can't see how does he know what it is like to see?"
for example: a blind man might know what colors are if he had previously HAD sight but if one has been
blind since childhood he would not know what colors are.True a blind man may have a general idea of
what something is by what his other senses create. (to feel someone's arm to have a picture of it) The
issue here is he does not have sight smell touch taste or hearing. Even if he did have them he has
posited himself that he lives in an empty void. This denotes that he is the sole object in this world and
as such has not come in contact with images.
yeah i think that's all that's needed for this one
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Tempted to null this debate, since it's just dressed up solipsism and, to the best of my knowledge, there's no solution for hard solipsism that's been found which at least sorta makes this seem abusive, since Pro placed the BoP on Con, instead of on themselves or sharing it, which I think would be more proper. That said, Con accepted it as written, and failed to PROVE the contrary. As such, I'm awarding arguments to Pro...but I'm not particularly happy to do so. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.