The Instigator
Pote
Pro (for)
Losing
11 Points
The Contender
Nails
Con (against)
Winning
34 Points

I will not contradict myself

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 8 votes the winner is...
Nails
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 958 times Debate No: 10356
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (8)

 

Pote

Pro

Resolved: I, Pote, 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 completely stole this from Nails, but it seemed like a fun debate. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, right?
Nails

Con

Question #1:

Is 0.99999...(continuing infinitely) inequal to 1?

Question #2:

Are statements made in Round 1 presumed to be correct by you?

Question #3:

Does all of the information on your profile (as of Sunday, December 6, 2009) correctly represent you?

Question #4:

Is my Dog's name Rufus?

Question #5:

Are all facts that you testify to on this debate presumed to be correct by you?

Question #6:

Is it possible that can I win this debate while following your rules?

Question #7:

Do you enjoy breaking the law?

Question #8:

Do you make more than $1,000 weekly?

Question #9:

Can 1/3 be expressed as an infinite amount 3's after a decimal point (0.3333...)?

Question #10:

Has Stephen Colbert showered Glenn Beck with excessive praise?
Debate Round No. 1
Pote

Pro

1. Is 0.99999...(continuing infinitely) inequal to 1?
Yes.

2. Are statements made in Round 1 presumed to be correct by you?
I think rule 5 protects me from these types of questions, and I cannot find any statements in your round 1. You may ask another question in the next round.

3. Does all of the information on your profile (as of Sunday, December 6, 2009) correctly represent you?
No, I do not believe that so little information could correctly represent me, and some of it is untrue.

4. Is my Dog's name Rufus?
I do not have enough information at this time to confirm nor deny. You get another question next round.

5. Are all facts that you testify to on this debate presumed to be correct by you?
If you mean all statements that I reply to your 10 questions per round with, or statements I make in this debate outside of the first round not in direct response to any question posed by you, yes.

6. Is it possible that can I win this debate while following your rules?
Yes, specifically, if I break rule 2 or if you can prove that I have contradicted myself (rule 4).

7. Do you enjoy breaking the law?
No, I do not derive any pleasure from doing illegal activities outside of the pleasure I would derive from doing the same activities were they legal. In other words, I do not directly enjoy breaking the law.

8. Do you make more than $1,000 weekly?
No.

9. Can 1/3 be expressed as an infinite amount 3's after a decimal point (0.3333...)?
It can and has been expressed in that way, but I do not think 1/3 is actually equal to an infinite amount of 3's after a decimal point.

10. Has Stephen Colbert showered Glenn Beck with excessive praise?
No, I do not consider Stephen Colbert's praise of Glenn Beck excessive.
Nails

Con

(Note: I realize I cannot directly use any round 1 quotes against Pro. This is why I asked question #2. If Pro answers yes/no and I somehow prove otherwise, it would contradict his answer #2, not necessarily his R1 post)

Revised question #2: Are the statements made in round 1 true? (If necessary, you may exclude 'I completely stole this from Nails,' to save face)

Revised question #4: Can you deem a statement 'true' at one point in this debate, then 'false' at a later point in the debate?
Debate Round No. 2
Pote

Pro

Revised question #2: Are the statements made in round 1 true? (If necessary, you may exclude 'I completely stole this from Nails,' to save face)
As several of the statements in my round 1 are imperatives that either CON or PRO loses or wins, and the winner and loser of this debate are ultimately determined by the voters, I cannot confirm nor deny this until the voting period is over.

Revised question #4: Can you deem a statement 'true' at one point in this debate, then 'false' at a later point in the debate?
I have the ability to do so, but it would negate the resolution and would lead to the victory of CON as defined by rule 4, but not necessarily a victory for CON as the voters ultimately decide the victor of this debate.

(Note: I hope that you did not waste all of your round 2 questions to clarify your questions, and if you did, you can post 10 questions in the comments that I will answer in my next round or you can post 10 extra questions in the next round. If you decide to post 10 extra questions in the next round it brings your total up to 22 questions if I am not mistaken.)
Nails

Con

I have asked (and PRO has answered) 10 questions in the comments section. Any answer given that you can't find above is most likely from his comment.

These are in no particular order.

===========
Contradiction #01
===========

Flattery:
•excessive or insincere praise
•Flattery (also called adulation or blandishment) is the act of giving excessive compliments, generally for the purpose of ingratiating oneself with the subject
http://www.google.com...

10. Has Stephen Colbert showered Glenn Beck with excessive praise?
"No, I do not consider Stephen Colbert's praise of Glenn Beck excessive."

2. Is imitation a sincere form of flattery?
"In my opinion, yes."

Steven Colbert often imitates Glenn Beck, as seen here: http://www.colbertnation.com...

He says that imitation is a form of flattery, but then he says that Stephen Colbert, though he imitates Glenn Beck, does not flatter him. A clear contradiction!

===========
Contradiction #02
===========

2. Are statements made in Round 1 presumed to be correct by you?
"I think rule 5 protects me from these types of questions."

5. If I asked you 'Are all statements you made in a previous debate correct?' and you answered 'yes,' could I prove that some statement on a previous debate contradicts a current statement?
"if I did answer yes, you could do so"

Early in the round, Pro says that rule #05 protects him from any questions like this, but then he later testifies that I could infact ask the same type of question without rule #05 anulling it. The 2 are exact opposites!

===========
Contradiction #03
===========

If you post something incorrect, does that count as a contradiction?
"Only if you can prove that I posted something incorrect in this debate/comments... Lies in other debates do not count."

Is 0.99999...(continuing infinitely) inequal to 1?
"Yes"

There are multiple proofs that .999(9) equals one here: http://en.wikipedia.org...

For example, here is one:

X = .999(9)
10X = 9.999(9)
10X - X = 9.999(9) - .999(9)
9X = 9
X = 1
.999(9) = 1

He has posted something incorrect, while saying that doing so would be a contradiction.

===========
Contradiction #04
===========

•several: of an indefinite number more than 2 or 3 but not many; "several letters came in the mail"; "several people"
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...

Revised question #2: Are the statements made in round 1 true?
"several of the statements in my round 1 are imperatives that either CON or PRO loses or wins..."

Here are all imperatives that either CON or PRO loses or wins:
"CON must post 10 questions... or else CON loses"
"PRO must respond to all questions... or else PRO loses."

These are the only 2 imperative sentences. All others are declarative/interrogative.

He has not posted several (more than 2) imperatives, just 2, thus his answer is in contradiction to this answer:

If you post something incorrect, does that count as a contradiction?
"Only if you can prove that I posted something incorrect in this debate/comments... Lies in other debates do not count."

===========
Contradiction #05
===========

8. [Is] your income status correct in that you're 'not saying'?
"It is correct that I am not saying on this website."

8. Do you make more than $1,000 weekly?
"No."

Pro has announced his income status on the website while saying that he won't.
Debate Round No. 3
Pote

Pro

Contradiction #01

I offer this definition of flattery:
1.paying of compliments to win favor: an act or instance of complimenting somebody, often excessively or insincerely, especially in order to gain an advantage
http://encarta.msn.com...
This definition differs in that it says "often excessively or insincerely". Just because his definition was posted first does not mean that it is the only definition. No matter how many definitions he provides, he cannot prove that my definition is not a true definition of flattery.
By my definition of flattery, it is possible for Colbert to imitate Glenn Beck without excessively praising him.

Contradiction #02

The questions that Con uses to prove this contradiction are very different, and thus my answers are different without contradicting myself. Con says that " I could infact ask the same type of question", but they are not the same type of question.
2. Are statements made in Round 1 presumed to be correct by you?
This is a direct question about statements in round 1, which rule 5 protects me from.

5. If I asked you 'Are all statements you made in a previous debate correct?' and you answered 'yes,' could I prove that some statement on a previous debate contradicts a current statement?
This is a hypothetical question.

Hypothetical: 1. involving ideas or possibilities: existing as or involving something that exists as an unproven idea, theory, or possibility
http://encarta.msn.com...
A hypothetical exists as an unproven idea. My answer of "if I did answer yes, you could do so" was also a hypothetical. Since neither of these hypotheticals have actually existed in this debate, and this is my last round and therefore the last time I will type in this debate, at least my hypothetical will never come into existence as a proven idea.
I typed "if I did answer yes, you could do so" with the express intent of not answering yes and therefore not ever actually answering the question. Unproven hypotheticals cannot be used to prove a contradiction, as they have never actually occurred.

Contradiction #03

I do not believe that any of the proofs found at http://en.wikipedia.org... actually prove that .999(9) is equal to 1.
This is for two main reasons:
1. The proofs include backward logic. The first few proofs are the best examples of this fallacy. The first proof states that .3333(3) is equal to 1/3, which it is only so if .9999(9)=1. The end result is assumed to be true before it is proven, which justifies the means to get to the end result. This does not prove anything.
2. There are mathematical flaws in some of the proofs. For example, the proof that my opponent posted is not true.
If "X =.999(9)" then "10X = 9.999(9)" is not true. For example, if I were to take 999999 and multiply it by 10, I would end up with a 0 at the end, which is significant. If I take any number of repeating 9's and multiply it by ten, there will be a zero at the end. If it is before the decimal, it is obviously significant. If it is after the decimal, it only becomes significant when subtracting a number with repeating values, such as was done in the proof. 9.99999(9)0 - .999999(9)9 for example, would end up with a value smaller than 9, not 9.
I do not have enough characters to disprove each proof, but I have found mathematical flaws or backwards logic in each of the proofs. I've also disproven the only example that my opponent has brought up in this debate.

Contradiction #04

This contradiction is based on the assumption that a statement and sentence are the same thing. They are not.
Statement: 1. expression in words: the expression in spoken or written words of something such as a fact, intention, or policy, or an instance of this
http://encarta.msn.com...
Sentence:1. grammar meaningful linguistic unit: a group of words or a single word that expresses a complete thought, feeling, or idea.
http://encarta.msn.com...
I clearly typed "several of the STATEMENTS" in my answer, and there are several imperative statements in my first round.

Contradiction #05

I said that I will not say my income status on this website and I have not. My answer of "No." to "Do you make more than $1,000 weekly?" is not a statement of my income status.
For example, it would be a lie to say that I make $999 weekly, although it does satisfy the requirement of making less than $1,000 weekly. This is because I do not make $999 weekly. Nobody on this website knows my weekly income because I have not said what my weekly income is. I have said that my weekly income is less than $1,000, but I have not said what my weekly income actually is.
Another way to look at this is x<1,000. What is x? You cannot know, because it has not been said. I'm out of chars. Good debate
Nails

Con

===========
Contradiction #01
===========

Type in 'define: flattery' on Google and you will come up with this: http://www.google.com...
A list of the most common sources for the definition of flattery (including the ones I posted)
All of them say that flattery is necessarily excessive. These are the most commonly used definitions, and I see no reason why we should use any other source.

Pro, however, provides a definition from here: http://encarta.msn.com...
An obscure Microsoft dictionary that I've never even heard of.

But then he claims:
"No matter how many definitions he provides, he cannot prove that my definition is not a true definition of flattery."
This is just nonsensical. Could I define flattery as 'the quality of being flat'? Not at all. Definitions are not 'Anything goes;' if your definition is from some unheard-of dictionary and contradicts the most common and accepted definitions, I would say it would certainly require soom justification...yet Pro hasn't provided any.

===========
Contradiction #02
===========

My opponent seems to think that a question being 'hypothetical' somehow makes it incomparable to an actual question. I'm not seeing the connection in his argument, but it doesn't matter. Let's just make both hypothetical.

Hypothetically...
If I asked "Are statements in round 1 correct?"
then Rule 5 would protect him from answering because using round 1 arguments violates rule 5.
(This hypothetical situation has been empirically verified above)

Hypothetically...
If I asked "Are statements from previous debate correct?"
then Pro would be allowed to answer 'yes,' and I could then use previous debates, though this violates Rule 5 normally.
(Pro testified to this being the case)

These are both from Pro's answers and are clearly contradictory (he doesn't contest that they are mutually exlusive.)
Now they are both in hypothetical form, also, so hopefully Pro can now understand.

===========
Contradiction #03
===========

By Pro's logic, 1 infinity + 1 infinity = 2 infinity. This is known not to be the case.

Still, it matters not. Even by Pro's logic, he is incorrect.

9.999(9) x 10, accoring to Pro, equals 9.999(9)0, not 9.999(9)
I'm not sure from where he gets this, but let's continue the equation assuming that to be true.

X = .999(9)
10X = 9.999(9)0
10X - X = 9.999(9)0 - .999(9)
9X = 9.000(0)0
X = 1
.999(9) = 1

We still arrive at the conclusion that .999(9) = 1, thus Pro has contradicted himself.

===========
Contradiction #04
===========

"I clearly typed 'several of the STATEMENTS' in my answer, and there are several imperative statements in my first round."

Pro doesn't believe this. If there were true, he would have pointed out the 3+ statements that he made. There are no sentences OR statements beyond the 2 that I listed. If Pro thought otherwise, he easily could have proved it by posting the one that I missed. He hasn't done that, so he hasn't proven his above assertion to be true in the slightest.

This means he has still contradicted himself here.

===========
Contradiction #05
===========

"'Do you make more than $1,000 weekly?' is not a statement of my income status."

It isn't? What is it a question of, then?

He knows he's contradicted himself, and he's grasping at straws here.
If I asked a man, whose salary was $101,545.32 what his income status was, he would most likely respond "$100,000," maybe even "$101,000" but it would be a queer thing to here "My income is $101,545 and 32 cents." We don't refer to our income specifically, we give it in general approximations. Pro need not tell me his exact income, be it $1 or $999, to inform me of his income status.

Even the way debate.org works attests to this. In setting your income status, does it prompt you to enter your exact income? No. It asks you where, in general, your salary falls. It gives you a few options such as "Less than $25000," "$50000 - $70000," and "More than $100000" to name a few. This then shows up on your profile as your Income Status. Pro has given us such an approximation of his income, thus revealing his income status and contradicting himself yet again.

=======
Conclusion
=======

I simply needed to show that Pro contradicted himself once. He's made this quite easy by contradicting himself 5 times over. Since my burden was only to prove to you 1 contradiction, even if you only find 1 of these 5 arguments that you agree with, you vote CON.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Pote 7 years ago
Pote
1. Do you enjoy driving above the speed limit?
No.

2. Is imitation a sincere form of flattery?
In my opinion, yes.

3. Suppose most experts in a field (science, mathematics, literature, medicine) agreed upon some aspect of that field, e.g. doctors agreeing that cigarettes are unhealthy. Would you trust their judgement?
It would depend on what aspect of the field. I do not believe that anything agreed upon by "most experts" is necessarily true, but if it seems like it could be true to me I will trust their judgement.

4.Does my dog have a white patch of fur on his ear?
I do not know.

5. If I asked you 'Are all statements you made in a previous debate correct?' and you answered 'yes,' could I prove that some statement on a previous debate contradicts a current statement?
I have lied in other debates, so I would not answer yes, but if I did answer yes, you could do so.

6. Consider the following,
X = .999(9)
10X = 9.999(9)
10X - X = 9.999(9)
9X = 9
X = 1
.999(9) = 1

Does the above series of equations prove that .999 (repeating) is equal to 1?
Your math is incorrect, so no. 10X-X =/= 9.999(9) if X = 1.

7. If you lie/ post something incorrect, does that count as a contradiction?
Only if you can prove that I lied or posted something incorrect in this debate/comments that is an answer your 10 questions or a statement I make not in response to any question by you. In other words, lies in other debates do not count.

8. Are you income, occupation, and religion status correct in that you're 'not saying'?
It is correct that I am not saying on this website.

9. If we both break the rules, do you win?
It depends on what the voters decide.

10. Will you only speak the truth in this round?
If you prove that I have contradicted myself in this comment it is applicable to the debate, if that is your question. If not, I do not understand the question.
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
Question 1:

Do you enjoy driving above the speed limit?

Question 2:

Is imitation a sincere form of flattery?

Question 3:

Suppose most experts in a field (science, mathematics, literature, medicine) agreed upon some aspect of that field, e.g. doctors agreeing that cigarettes are unhealthy. Would you trust their judgement?

Question 4:

Does my dog have a white patch of fur on his ear?

Question 5:

If I asked you 'Are all statements you made in a previous debate correct?' and you answered 'yes,' could I prove that some statement on a previous debate contradicts a current statement?

Question 6:

Consider the following,
X = .999(9)
10X = 9.999(9)
10X - X = 9.999(9)
9X = 9
X = 1
.999(9) = 1

Does the above series of equations prove that .999 (repeating) is equal to 1?

Question 7:

If you lie/ post something incorrect, does that count as a contradiction?

Question 8:

Are you income, occupation, and religion status correct in that you're 'not saying'?

Question 9:

If we both break the rules, do you win?

Question 10:

Will you only speak the truth in this round?
Posted by Pote 7 years ago
Pote
I was just going off of what I remembered from http://www.debate.org... but it seems that 10 questions were not asked in round 2 in that debate either, so it might be a trend that I didn't pick up on.

And you can ask 10 more questions in the comments if you want.
Posted by Pote 7 years ago
Pote
Revised question #2:
Are these sentences all true:
(Assume that a true command is one that must be followed)
CON must post 10 questions, for PRO, that could be answered with a 'yes' or 'no' or else CON loses.
This debate seemed fun to Pro when it was posted.
Imitation is a sincere form of flattery?

Not all of them, no.
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
"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."

It doesn't say anything about questions per round, just simple 10 questions total. If you'd like, I'll ask 10 more questions in comments.

However, for the now twice neither confirmed or denied question 2, I would rather ask it in comments. This way if/when I present a contradiction, you'll have a chance to rebut it.

Revised question #2:
Are these sentences all true:
(Assume that a true command is one that must be followed)
CON must post 10 questions, for PRO, that could be answered with a 'yes' or 'no' or else CON loses.
This debate seemed fun to Pro when it was posted.
Imitation is a sincere form of flattery?
Posted by wonderwoman 7 years ago
wonderwoman
I believe it is WJM
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
It wasn't my idea originally. I'm not sure who to give credit for inventing this.
Posted by Cody_Franklin 7 years ago
Cody_Franklin
You forgot to put "libertarian" in quotation marks.
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
Lol, another libertarian. They exist only on the internet.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by InterB 7 years ago
InterB
PoteNailsTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Vote Placed by Marauder 7 years ago
Marauder
PoteNailsTied
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 
Vote Placed by LenseJockey 7 years ago
LenseJockey
PoteNailsTied
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 Nails 7 years ago
Nails
PoteNailsTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by EHS_Debate 7 years ago
EHS_Debate
PoteNailsTied
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 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 Cyntage 7 years ago
Cyntage
PoteNailsTied
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:23 
Vote Placed by Pote 7 years ago
Pote
PoteNailsTied
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 debatingturtle 7 years ago
debatingturtle
PoteNailsTied
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