The Instigator
mongoose
Pro (for)
Losing
10 Points
The Contender
wjmelements
Con (against)
Winning
47 Points

I will not contradict myself.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 10 votes the winner is...
wjmelements
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/17/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,350 times Debate No: 8676
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (15)
Votes (10)

 

mongoose

Pro

I will now try to defeat the diabolical wizard.

Contradiction: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Rules:
1. In Rounds 1-3, CON will ask PRO ten Yes/No questions.
2. In Rounds 2-4, PRO will answer all of CON's questions.
3. In Rounds 2-4, CON can point out any contradictions that he or she believes to be present in PRO's answers.
4. When CON points out a contradiction, PRO may use all of the following rounds to defend the accused contradiction until either CON drops the accusation or PRO admits defeat, or when the debate is over.
5. If CON ever fails to ask PRO exactly ten Yes/No questions when necessary, CON automatically loses.
6. If PRO ever fails to answer every question asked in the previous round by the rules, PRO automatically loses.
7. If PRO is never found to have contradicted himself, PRO wins.
8. If PRO is ever found to have contradicted himself, PRO loses.
9. Because sources are irrelevant, the two points associated with sources will be given to the victor of the debate.

Good luck.
wjmelements

Con

I thank my opponent for this challenge.

1. Should people have the right to consciously do bodily harm to themselves?
2. Is a fascist nation a good nation?
3. Is compulsory allegiance fascism?
4. Is the dictionary a reliable source?
5. When in conflict, should libety be valued over patriotism?
6. Are your opinions on "The BIG Issues" equivalent to your actual opinions?
7. Is it fascism to instill the government's beliefs into a population?
8. When in conflict, should liberty be valued over environmental protection?
9. Is the United States a good country?
10. Is fascism okay if it stimulates the economy?
Debate Round No. 1
mongoose

Pro

"1. Should people have the right to consciously do bodily harm to themselves?"
Um... as long as it does not infringe other people's rights.

"2. Is a fascist nation a good nation?"

Depends on your definition of "good." No.

"3. Is compulsory allegiance fascism?"

I can't find what "compulsory allegiance" is anywhere, so I will assume that it requires you to pledge allegiance to the flag. No.

"4. Is the dictionary a reliable source?"

Yes.

"5. When in conflict, should libety be valued over patriotism?"

Yes.

"6. Are your opinions on 'The BIG Issues' equivalent to your actual opinions?"

Yes.

"7. Is it fascism to instill the government's beliefs into a population?"

Yes.

"8. When in conflict, should liberty be valued over environmental protection?"

Yes.

"9. Is the United States a good country?"

With Obama as president and a Liberal Congress? Good: financially sound or safe. No.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

"10. Is fascism okay if it stimulates the economy?"

No.
wjmelements

Con

I suspected my opponent would do this:

"mongoose updated his stand on the BIG Issues.1 hour ago"

He essentially changed all of his opinions to "Not Saying". Fortunately, I foresaw this and copied all of his "BIG Issues" viewpoints onto a .txt file on my computer. I will still use them as if they were truly on his profile.

Compulsory- reqiired
allegiance- loyalty
I expect you to re-answer Number 3 from Round 1, as you were incorrect in guessing it.

1. Should people be able to smoke cigarettes in the privacy of their own homes?
2. Is the ability to smoke cigarettes a "tobacco right"?
3. Should people be aloud to smoke cigarettes if they can afford the medical expenses involved in potential resulting treatment?
4. Should people be aloud to chew tobacco as long as the dip is properly disposed of after use?
5. Is the ability to chew tobacco a "tobacco right"?
6. Are Wikipedia articles that have over 25 sources reliable?
7. When using Wikipedia sources in debates, do you only use reliable ones?
8. Was the United States a good country when under President George W. Bush in 2004?
9. In U.S. history class, was it obvious that the government was conveying its beliefs?
10. Is the current public education system compulsory?
Debate Round No. 2
mongoose

Pro

I would like to point out that before I answered the question, I decided that there were many things on my BIG Issues page that I was not sure about. For example, I don't really know the difference between the wars in the Middle East, or what they've accomplished, or anything. At the time I answered the question, my BIG Issues page was equivalent to my opinions.

"3. Is compulsory allegiance fascism?"
"Compulsory- reqiired [sic]
allegiance- loyalty"

Hmm. Yes.

"1. Should people be able to smoke cigarettes in the privacy of their own homes?"

Yes.

"2. Is the ability to smoke cigarettes a 'tobacco right'?"

Yes.

"3. Should people be aloud [sic] to smoke cigarettes if they can afford the medical expenses involved in potential resulting treatment?"

Only on private property.

"4. Should people be aloud [sic] to chew tobacco as long as the dip is properly disposed of after use?"

Only on private property.

"5. Is the ability to chew tobacco a 'tobacco right'?"

Yes.

"Are Wikipedia articles that have over 25 sources reliable?"

Yes.

"7. When using Wikipedia sources in debates, do you only use reliable ones?"

Yes.

"8. Was the United States a good country when under President George W. Bush in 2004?"

No. We were still in debt.

"9. In U.S. history class, was it obvious that the government was conveying its beliefs?"

Yes, but on the other hand, they're right.

"10. Is the current public education system compulsory?"

Yes.

I know what you're trying to do.
wjmelements

Con

I thank my opponent for answering number 3 again.

"At the time I answered the question, my BIG Issues page was equivalent to my opinions."

"Not saying" is not an opinion.

My opponent's opinion on the "Tobacco Rights" issue is "CON", though he has temporarily changed it to "Not Saying".
1. Is the above statement true?
2. Is "Not saying" distinguishable from "Undecided" or "Pro"?
3. Does going to "Not saying" mean that your opinion has changed?

My opponent's opinion on the "United States" issue is "PRO", though he has temporarily changed it to "Not Saying".
4. Is the above statement true?
5. Does the government instill its beliefs into you?
6. When, in the United States, one is not allegiant to the government, is that person threatened with legal punishment?
7. When something is mandatory and enforced by the force of law enforcement, is it compulsory?
8. Is the C.I.S.D. Student Handbook a credible source?

9. Are you capable of looking definitions up yourself?
10. Should debaters do their own research or just guess?
Debate Round No. 3
mongoose

Pro

"1. Is the above statement true?"

No.

"2. Is "Not saying" distinguishable from "Undecided" or "Pro"?"

It is pretty much "Undecided."

"3. Does going to "Not saying" mean that your opinion has changed?"

I realized that I knew little to nothing about the subject, so I decided that I didn't have a true opinion of it.

"4. Is the above statement true?"

No.

"5. Does the government instill its beliefs into you?"

It tries.

"6. When, in the United States, one is not allegiant to the government, is that person threatened with legal punishment?"

Usually.

"7. When something is mandatory and enforced by the force of law enforcement, is it compulsory?"

Yes.

"8. Is the C.I.S.D. Student Handbook a credible source?"

No.

"9. Are you capable of looking definitions up yourself?"

Yes.

"10. Should debaters do their own research or just guess?"

Yes.

You were trying to get me to call the U.S. a good, fascist nation, weren't you?
wjmelements

Con

I believe that I got you on 1 of the 4 ways that I was trying to get you. 1 was not achieved because I failed to word my questions correctly, and the other two were not achieved because my opponent chose to contradict himself the first way instead.

Contradiction- logical incompatibility between 2 or more propositions. http://en.wikipedia.org...

1. Not Saying is "pretty much" Undecided, yet The Dictionary is a reliable source.

If the dictionary is a reliable source, then Not Saying cannot be "pretty much" Undecided.

not- used to express negation, denial, refusal, or prohibition http://dictionary.reference.com...
saying (say)- to speak; declare; express an opinion http://dictionary.reference.com...
is (be)- used as a copula to connect the subject with its predicate adjective, or predicate nominative, in order to describe, identify, or amplify the subject http://dictionary.reference.com...
pretty- considerable; fairly great http://dictionary.reference.com...
much- great in quantity, measure, or degree http://dictionary.reference.com...
undecided- not having one's mind firmly made up http://dictionary.reference.com...

Not having one's mind firmly made up is not considerably great in measure indentical to choosing not to express an opinion.

While one may choose not to express an opinion because that opinion is not made up, one may also not express an opinion because one wishes to be expedient, to keep that view hidden, or to avoid conflict.

Just as rectangles are not "pretty much" squares, Not Saying is not "pretty much" Undecided.

I await my opponent's rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 4
mongoose

Pro

My opponent's entire argument now lies on distinguishing "Not Saying" from "No Opinion." I think that I can get through this.

My response was my use of the option of "Not Saying." Really, "Not Saying" could be anything, you just don't know it. When I used "Not Saying," it meant something along the lines of "No Opinion," except you couldn't be certain until I confirmed it. So, "Not Saying" was "pretty much" "No Opinion."

"saying (say)- ...to express an opinion"

By "not saying," I am not expressing an opinion. This is considerably similar to having no opinion.
wjmelements

Con

The essence of my opponent's rebuttal is that not expressing an opinion is "pretty much" the same as not having one.

This is quite simple to refute, as if there is a rock under the ground and not seen (expressed), then it is still there.

So, there is a considerable difference between not displaying and not having, just as there is a considerable difference between a rectangle and a square.

If the dictionary is a reliable source, then "Not Saying" is not "pretty much" "No Opinion".
If "Not Saying" is not "pretty much" "No Opinion", then the dictionary must be flawed.

So, my opponent has contradicted himself.
Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 5
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
They were the same thing. When you opted for the second option, you also opted for the second option of the other.
Posted by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
"-Had you admitted that you still were against Tobacco Rights, then you would have contradicted yourself
-Had you not, then you would have contradicted the dictionary"

Why didn't you use this instead?
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Perhaps, but I don't think he was required to give a Yes or a No.
"2. In Rounds 2-4, PRO will answer all of CON's questions."
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
"In Rounds 1-3, CON will ask PRO ten Yes/No questions."
Or rather, they were not "yes" or "no" answers. They were "yes, but..." answers. Is that a rule violation?
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
What are you referring to?
Posted by TFranklin62 7 years ago
TFranklin62
those really weren't "yes" or "no" questions :D
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
-Had you admitted that you still believed that the U.S. was a good nation, then you would have obviously contradicted yourself
-Had you not, then you would have contradicted the dictionary
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-Had you said that the U.S. was not a fascist nation, then you would have contradicted yourself
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-Had you admitted that you still were against Tobacco Rights, then you would have contradicted yourself
-Had you not, then you would have contradicted the dictionary
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
(Had I worded myself correctly)
-You would have contradicted yourself in that debaters should do their own research
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Two of them were unavoidable contradictions, and the other 2 were if you weren't paying attention.
Posted by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
Darn. What were your other dibolical plans?
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
And you already agreed with everything in the dictionary and on Wikipedia pages with 25 or more sources.
I believe that I have you cornered.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
However, he knows what you were before you were Not Saying, and Not Saying doesn't change your opinion.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by BlackMask 7 years ago
BlackMask
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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 MrMarkP37 7 years ago
MrMarkP37
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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 PieofLife 7 years ago
PieofLife
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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 mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by KRFournier 7 years ago
KRFournier
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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:16 
Vote Placed by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Vote Placed by alto2osu 7 years ago
alto2osu
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Vote Placed by FlashFire 7 years ago
FlashFire
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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 KeithKroeger91 7 years ago
KeithKroeger91
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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 wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
mongoosewjmelementsTied
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:05