The Instigator
Nails
Pro (for)
Losing
40 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Con (against)
Winning
44 Points

I will not contradict myself.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/21/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,349 times Debate No: 9781
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (35)
Votes (15)

 

Nails

Pro

Resolved: I, Nails, will not contradict myself.

Rules:

1. CON must post 10 questions, directed at PRO, that could be answered with a 'yes' or 'no' or else CON loses. This does not apply to the final round.

2. PRO must respond to all questions posed by CON in some manner or else PRO loses.

3. If PRO's response does not give any opinion (e.g. "I don't know" or "I'm not sure"), then CON is entitled to another question next round. This is the only reason CON may post more than 10 questions.

4. PRO wins if he is found never to have contradicted himself. Likewise, CON wins if he can prove that PRO has contradicted himself.

5. Only statements made by PRO in rounds 2, 3, and 4 of this debate are subject to be examined for contradiction. No outside sources (my profile, previous debates, etc.) are applicable. Statements made by PRO in this debate not in direct response to any question posed by CON are still applicable.
===========

I've enjoyed reading these debates and would like to participate in one.
If there are any loopholes in the rules, please don't exploit them. I think the general idea is pretty clear.

Good luck to whomever my opponent is!
Logical-Master

Con

#1. Are you Nails?

#2. Are you tough?

#3. Do you believe Santa Claus is real?

#4. What did you have for dinner last night?

#5. Do you believe existence is dictated by logic?

#6. Do you adhere to the claim "I will not contradict myself"?

#7. Do you believe ideas exist?

#8. Do you believe God is real?

#9. Do you believe God can do anything?

#10. Do you believe there is not a today of yesterday's tomorrow?
Debate Round No. 1
Nails

Pro

I am looking forward to this debate, as well as hopefully disproving any claims that my opponent really is a logical master. Maybe my expectations are too high.

Anyways, I am submitting this tonight because I will be busy for the next 22 hours and have little time to post arguments. These answers were somewhat rushed, however, I am confident that I have not contradicted myself. I wish my opponent luck in proving otherwise.
=============================

#1. Are you Nails?
I am indeed the same person who created this account. You could refer to me as Nails. Yes.

#2. Are you tough?
I'd like to think that I'm tough as nails.
Unfortunately, no. I'd describe myself as average on a toughness scale, not tough.

#3. Do you believe Santa Claus is real?
No

#4. What did you have for dinner last night?
This isn't a yes or no question. I'd rather not win on a disqualification as simple as this, though, even if it would be to a renowned debater such as yourself, so I'll happily substitute the question you posted in comments:
Did you have Dinner last night?

Yes, I did.

#5. Do you believe existence is dictated by logic?
I'm sorry, but I'm not entirely sure what you are asking. Could you ask a different question or clarify this next round? As per Rule 3, you don't need to count it as one of your 10 questions.

#6. Do you adhere to the claim "I will not contradict myself"?
I do not believe that any statements I make in the rounds of this debate will be contradictory.
I do not plan on contradicting myself any time in the future, though it is possible.
I have most likely contradicted myself in the past.

#7. Do you believe ideas exist?
Idea is a genus of butterflies known as Tree nymphs or Paper butterflies. The member species are concentrated around southeast Asia. http://en.wikipedia.org...(genus)
Yes, these exist.

•a personal view; "he has an idea that we don't like him" http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...
Yes, I also believe that these exist.

In my search, I saw a plethora of definitions. If you meant another definition of idea, then I haven't answered your question, and by all means re-ask it.

#8. Do you believe God is real?
Yes

#9. Do you believe God can do anything?
Yes

#10. Do you believe there is not a today of yesterday's tomorrow?
Same as #5. I am very confused as to what you are asking.
Logical-Master

Con

I too am looking forward to a battle of wits my opponent. And although my name is Logical-Master, the true purpose of the name is vastly misinterpreted. Nevertheless (and to quote Darth Revan), "Who I am is not important---my message is."

Let us begin.

Revised Question#5: Do you believe that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is?

Revised Question #10: Based on the following definition, would you say ideas exist: "Mean what exists in the mind as a representation (as of something comprehended) or as a formulation (as of a plan). idea may apply to a mental image or formulation of something seen or known or imagined, to a pure abstraction, or to something assumed or vaguely sensed "
Debate Round No. 2
Nails

Pro

I wish my opponent good luck in proving that I have contradicted myself. I'd also like to say thanks to my opponent for helping me out by holding off on posting his round to give me more time to respond. As it turns out, however, I have been able to finish this within the little time to post arguments that I've had.
============================================================================
Revised Question#5: Do you believe that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is?

Yes, I believe that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is.
============================================================================

Revised Question #10: Based on the following definition, would you say ideas exist: "Mean what exists in the mind as a representation (as of something comprehended) or as a formulation (as of a plan). idea may apply to a mental image or formulation of something seen or known or imagined, to a pure abstraction, or to something assumed or vaguely sensed "

Yes, I would say ideas exist.
============================================================================
Logical-Master

Con

=============
CONTRADICTIONS: |
=============

As of now, there have been a total of two contradictions on the instigator's part:

Contradiction #1: My opponent does not believe Santa Claus is real. Santa Claus is at very least an idea (based on that definition), thus exist as an idea. My opponent believe ideas exist (and agrees to my definition), ergo . . . a contradiction.

Contradiction #2: My opponent believes that God can do anything. He also believes that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is. Based on the Bible, there are a number of things God cannot do: http://www.letusreason.org... Ergo . . . contradiction.

==========
QUESTIONS |
==========

1) Is the answer to this question "I don't know?"
2) Is the answer to the above question "I don't know?"
3) Is the answer to this question "no?"
4) Must something be logical to exist?
5) Are your bones very hard?
6) Do you think it's possibly to truly "know" something?
7) Are contradictions ever beneficial?
8) Are lies considered contradictions?
9) Is it possible to create a rock that cannot be lifted?
10) If Batman and Spider-Man had to fight, would Spider-Man win?
Debate Round No. 3
Nails

Pro

I am surprised we have come so far along in this debate without defining contradictory.

Contradictory
•Any of a pair of propositions that cannot both be true

============
CONTRADICTIONS:
============

Contradiction #1: My opponent does not believe Santa Claus is real. Santa Claus is at very least an idea (based on that definition), thus exist as an idea. My opponent believe ideas exist (and agrees to my definition), ergo . . . a contradiction.

---
Real: being or occurring in fact or actuality; "real objects"; "real people, not ghosts"; "a film based on real ...
My opponent himself said: "[ideas] mean what exists in the mind."
I will agree with my opponent, also, that "Santa Claus is at very least an idea."

Santa Claus is an idea.
Ideas are what exist in the mind.
Santa Claus exists in the mind.

Real is 'being or occuring in fact or actuality.'
Santa Claus does not occur in fact or actuality.
Santa Claus is not real.

The idea of Santa Claus can exist in the mind whether or not Santa Claus is infact Real. Common sense shows this:
Santa Claus is not real (or so I am told.)
Many young children have the idea that Santa Claus exists.

These can both be true, (and they most certainly are!) so they cannot be contradictory.

One last note on this 'contradiction,' I may or may not have reached into my bag of assorted hallucinogens, containing joints made from a variety of dangerous drugs (http://www.buzzle.com...), pulled one out, and smoked it this afternoon. This particular experience gave me the idea that I was a mermaid. I suppose that if my opponent believes that the simple idea that St. Nick exists would be enough to make him real, then my opponent is debating a mermaid, for I had that particular idea this afternoon.
======

Contradiction #2: My opponent believes that God can do anything. He also believes that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is. Based on the Bible, there are a number of things God cannot do: http://www.letusreason.org...... Ergo . . . contradiction.

---
I'll just post the relevant questions/ answers here, so that nobody needs to look back to previous arguments to double check. I'll also point out that I, like many other (most other) Christians have not read the entirety of the Bible as it is quite a long book. I only make assumptions on what it says based on what I have read and what I hear from others.

#9. Do you believe God can do anything?
Yes

Revised Question#5: Do you believe that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is?
Yes, I believe that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is.

Due to time constraints (bed time) I won't be able to read my opponent's source. I'll assume, based on the context used, that his source shows some proof or evidence supporting the claim that the Bible says God can't do anything. There's atleast 3 possibilities here:

1. God can't do anything.
2. The Bible does not accurately interpret who/what God is.
3. The sources in his link are false/illogical/misinterpreted or in some way draw a valid conclusion.

As I have testified in the two above questions, I believe that both 1 & 2 are false, meaning the third option must be true about this source of his.

As long as I believe option 3 is true, then it stands to follow that both of these statements are true:
"Yes, [I believe God can do anything.]"
"Yes, I believe that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is."

I do believe and will continue believing that the source, whatever it may be is untrue, that God can do anything, and that the Bible accurately interprets who/ what God is. This means the statements I have made are not in any way contradictory to each other.

Perhaps my opponent could have caught me in the way he seems to have intended to by asking "Can God do anything?" or "Does the Bible accurately interpret who/what God is?" Instead, he has asked me what I BELIEVE. It is entirely possible that both of my statements are true because I can and do believe what I claimed to.

In short, my opponent, to prove that the statements are contradictory, would have to show that I can't possibly believe both of the things that I said I did. It is possible that I can believe both; I do believe both; therefore, they are in no way contradictory, regardless of whether my opponent or anyone else agrees with what I believe.
======

I certainly have not contradicted myself so far. I wish my opponent luck in finding contradictions in these answers. Unfortunately, I will not have a chance to respond.

==========
QUESTIONS |
==========

1) Is the answer to this question "I don't know?"
No

2) Is the answer to the above question "I don't know?"
No

3) Is the answer to this question "no?"
It ain't

4) Must something be logical to exist?
I have so many thoughts on this, at the risk of being misinterpreted and not having a chance to clarify or respond, I will have to say that I'm not sure.

5) Are your bones very hard?
'Very' seems subjective, as does hard. How hard is 'very hard'? I don't know.
They are very hard compared to paper, I should think.
They aren't very hard compared to diamonds.
I do not know how my bones compare to other bones in terms of hardness.

6) Do you think it's possibly to truly "know" something?
This word 'truly' has me worried. I'm not exactly sure how it changes the meaning of the sentence.

In the way that I use the term "know" on a daily basis, it would make sense that one could know something.
I know the answer to question #7 in the homework packet.
No, I didn't know that we had a test today.

It might be possible for my opponent to argue that knowing really means something or that we don't really know what we say we know. However, based on the way I most commonly see the word used, my answer is yes.
7) Are contradictions ever beneficial?
Yes

8) Are lies considered contradictions?
It depends.
I could truthfully state that I hate carrots and then lie by saying that I love them. In this case, it seems that lie would be a contradiction.
On the other hand, I could continuously maintain throughout my life that I love carrots, never uttering a word otherwise. It is possible that I could lie in such a way and avoid ever contradicting myself.

My answer would be that lies are sometimes contradictions. Lies can be contradictions, but not all lies are necessarily contradictions.
(I'm assuming here that a contradiction would be disagreeing with oneself, as it is being used in this debate round, and not in some other way as in 'contradictory to the truth')

9) Is it possible to create a rock that cannot be lifted?
Yes,
I see no reason why an omnipotent God would be confined to doing the logical.

I realize that this one of the common arguments in the debate over God. I have also realized that many of the judges on this site don't share my strong belief in God. I trust your judgment, but please keep in mind that my job is not to prove all of my statements true (trying to fit an argument for the existence of God into my remaining 500 characters would be absurd!), my job is not to contradict myself.

10) If Batman and Spider-Man had to fight, would Spider-Man win?
I'm not too familiar with the two, but I could imagine it going both ways dependent on the circumstance.
If I ever do see them fight, I'll root for Spidey.
Logical-Master

Con

I shall finish this debate by solely focusing on the contradictions which I've accused my opponent of making:

============
CONTRADICTIONS:
============

>>>>>>>>>>>>>Concerning Contradiction # 1:

RE: "Real: being or occurring in fact or actuality; "real objects"; "real people, not ghosts"; "a film based on real ..."

Not at all and EVEN my opponent realizes this. For you see ladies and gentleman, the terms real and exist possess the same meaning. Let us take a gander at merriam webster's dictionary: http://www.merriam-webster.com...

QUOTE: 1 a : to have real being whether material or spiritual b : to have being in a specified place or with respect to understood limitations or conditions

My opponent agreed that ideas exist. Therefore, he is to agree that they have REAL being . . .

RE: Real is 'being or occuring in fact or actuality.'"

Agreed. Unfortunately for my opponent, the mind is "being or occurring in fact or actuality." It is however just not on the same plane of reality as things which exist outside the mind. A different playing field so to speak. Think of it an airplane. There are certain people who are luckily seated in first class whereas other people are seated in 2nd and 3rd class. Nevertheless, all of the people can be considered as being inside the airplane. The same applies here.

The primary problem with my opponent's argument is that it simply boils down to him defining real on the basis of his authority (someone who has every reason to define a term to work in his position's favor). Without acknowledging that, we have no reason to uphold his position. On the other hand, as you can see, I've offered an unbiased source that confirms my stance (merriam webster's dictionary. A credible one to boot).

RE: The idea of Santa Claus can exist in the mind whether or not Santa Claus is infact Real. Common sense shows this
Santa Claus is not real (or so I am told.)"

"RE: One last note on this 'contradiction,' I may or may not have reached into my bag of assorted hallucinogens, containing joints made from a variety of dangerous drugs (http://www.buzzle.com......), pulled one out, and smoked it this afternoon. This particular experience gave me the idea that I was a mermaid. I suppose that if my opponent believes that the simple idea that St. Nick exists would be enough to make him real, then my opponent is debating a mermaid, for I had that particular idea this afternoon.

The problem with my opponent's cute anectdote is the fact that it is (intentioally) misinterpreting my argument in implying that I'd view Saint Nick as being on the same scale of reality as I would most things. However, as you can see based on what I've already argue: Although ideas are real/exist, they are not in the same category as the word than something such as a polar bear or a speed boat..

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Concerning Contradiction #2:

RE: "Due to time constraints (bed time) I won't be able to read my opponent's source. I'll assume, based on the context used, that his source shows some proof or evidence supporting the claim that the Bible says God can't do anything. There's atleast 3 possibilities here:"

I suspect my opponent is attempting to pull a fast one given that merely reading my source would provide evidence of God being listed as doing something which he cannot do. My opponent has used this ruse so that he may argue based on the technicality that he can both believe that the Bible accurately interprets who/what God is and believe that God can do anything. In order to get around this tactic, I need only offer you (the audience) reason to believe that my opponent is in fact aware of some of the information on the page I linked to.

1) I posted a scripture cited in my source in the comment section. As indicated by my links below, my opponent has been online recently, thus has had ample opportunity to see the comment
2) I added my opponent to my friend's list recently while throwing in the cited verse on the friends comment. Given that my opponent accepted my friend request recently, he had to have seen it.

This makes it to where my opponent is in fact shown to be aware of an instance in the Bible where God is shown with restrictions, hence solidifying this as a contradiction.

Thanks for the debate. :D

SOURCES:

http://img148.imageshack.us...
http://img26.imageshack.us...
Debate Round No. 4
35 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Eros 7 years ago
Eros
Everything is existent. Anything not existent is absolutely nothing.

Eros for your correction.
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
Haha, don't mind that comment voters.
I think the 2nd contradiction is probably what's winning you the votes anyway.
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
Invalid because it asked what I believe. I certainly still believe it. I also think you make 'existing in the mind' and 'real or actual' the same. I'd say the common definition would say they aren't.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Indeed, twas quite fun.

Lets debate over the validity of my first contradiction here in the comment section. :)
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
I enjoyed that tactic on your last contradiction. I wish we would have had another round to argue it.

As for the 1st, I don't like your argument at all or believe in it, but too late now.

A very good debate.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Man, that was more rushed than I thought it was. Obvious spelling errors and unnecessary quotations. Blech!
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Heheheh. Had to rush that last round. Could've been better, but eh, my point is across, so that's what counts. :)
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
"Christians have not read the entirety of the Bible as it is quite a long book. I only make assumptions on what it says based on what I have read and what I hear from others."

Very clever. :D

Still . . . even if you have read a little bit of the Bible (even in early Genesis), limitations placed on God are too clear. That and you've given me an idea:

Heb.6:18 He can't lie = he can't break a unconditional promise what he says he will fulfill. He is the truth, there is no darkness in him. He cannot go back on His Word.
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
If you want to ask 10 more questions, then go for it. That was how the debate was intended to go. I just left out 'per round' in the rules without thinking about it.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Question: So give that little mishap on my part, am I to ask no more questions or am I allowed to ask 10 in this round?
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:52 
Vote Placed by newguy 6 years ago
newguy
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by dpflames786 6 years ago
dpflames786
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by bigtree 6 years ago
bigtree
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:52 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by lelanatty 7 years ago
lelanatty
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Vote Placed by omelet 7 years ago
omelet
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Vote Placed by Conor 7 years ago
Conor
NailsLogical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by trivea 7 years ago
trivea
NailsLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15