The Instigator
Capitalistslave
Pro (for)
The Contender
farmerjump1
Con (against)

I will win the below debate with ViceRegent(if they accept the debate)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
farmerjump1 has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/5/2017 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 417 times Debate No: 98707
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Capitalistslave

Pro

This is the debate: http://www.debate.org...
I'm not sure if it is accessible to other people right now, as it's still in a phase where it needs to be accepted by ViceRegent.

If you can't access it, this is what I wrote so far in the title and round 1 of the debate:

Topic: "Does ViceRegent have a rational way of knowing truth from fiction?"

"Burden of proof is with ViceRegent, as (s)he must prove (s)he has a way of knowing truth from fiction, otherwise it can be assumed that (s)he has no way of knowing.


Thought I'd turn this around a little and challenge him/her in the same way he/she did to every atheist on this site.

If you don't already know, ViceRegent has done the same debate 64 times(as of me writing this) on the topic of whether atheists know truth from fiction. You may view them here: http://www.debate.org......

Seriously folks, you can click on the seventh page of that and still see the same debate there from the first page.

Rules
ViceRegent should immediately begin their arguments in round 1, since they have BoP. To keep the argument rounds even, ViceRegent should not use the last round for debate, but(as I suspect they will do) only insults or just stating that they are not doing any arguments. It will likely be insults the entire debate from ViceRegent, but maybe they will surprise everyone and actually be civil. If these rules are broken, ViceRegent should be penalized by the voters by voting for me for conduct.

As established in their previous debates, science is not a reasonable method of knowing truth from fiction because it relies on senses self-validating senses which is circular reasoning."

Rules of this debate:
1) Con may begin their argument in round 1, but if they choose to do so, they must not use the last round for argument in order to keep the rounds for argument used between us even.
2) Google Docs are permitted, but don't go over the 10,000 character limit. Character limits are necessary so that readers don't have to read an entire book, and it puts us as the debators on a more even playing field.
3) No insults
4) The last round used for debate by either side should just be rebuttals/defense and no new arguments.
If any of the above rules are violated, voters should vote for the one who did not violate any rules for conduct.

If ViceRegent rejects the debate at any time during this debate, this does not count as a loss for pro as I put the condition "if they accept the debate".
farmerjump1

Con

Obviously my opponent suffers from some sort of mild autism.

The answer is yes, ViceRegent knows truth from fiction.

I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 1
Capitalistslave

Pro

Any quotes from my opponent or ViceRegentwill be italicized for this whole debate.

Obviously my opponent suffers from some sort of mild autism. -farmerump1
First, this is an ad hominem and has nothing to do with the debate. Secondly, I've never been diagnosd with autism, and it would be on con to prove that I have it. They are likely not a psychologist or psychiatrist, so they do not have the authority or knowledge to diagnose anyone with any psychiatric disorder.


The reason why I believe I will win the debate with ViceRegent, is not so much because he has no means of knowing truth from fiction, but because he has no means of knowing truth from fiction that he hasn't already dismissed as irrational in previous debates.

As you can see with this quote from ViceRegent, he does not believe senses and reason are a rational way of knowing truth from fiction:
If all you have is "science", do not respond to this debate, for science relies on the your senses and reason, which begs the question of how you know your senses and reason are valid. -ViceRegent [1] And there is further evidence of this in their other debates and the remainder of that debate.

I contend that there is no other way to know the difference between fact and fiction other than through senses and reason, and since ViceRegent dismisses them as an irrational way of knowing truth from fiction, they cannot win this debate I issued to them without being a hypocrite or having double standards.

Unless con can show another rational way of knowing fact from fiction, there doesn't seem to be a way ViceRegent can win this debate.




Sources:
[1] http://www.debate.org...;
farmerjump1

Con

Because it is one of my opponent's first debates I will be taking it easy on the kid.

My opponent said he has "never been diagnosd with autism". "Diagnosd" is not a word in the English language so I had to create a definition for it myself. The official definition for diagnosd is now "not diagnosed". So, what he was saying was "I have never been not diagnosed with autism", further proving my point.

As for the quote from ViceRegent that my opponent gave, he failed to give the rest of the context. The quote is "If all you have is "science", do not respond to this debate, for science relies on the your senses and reason, which begs the question of how you know your senses and reason are valid. -ViceRegent. What he failed to add was the part where ViceRegent said "just kidding".

(Sorry if I seem too harsh, I am used to arguing with intelligent professors and not special needs children. Sorry, CapitalistSlave! No hard feelings, okay?)
Debate Round No. 2
Capitalistslave

Pro

"Because it is one of my opponent's first debates I will be taking it easy on the kid." -farmerjump1
If you go to my profile and my opponent's profile, anyone can see that I have done 34 debates as of this moment[2] and this is the first debate for Farmerjump1[3]. Not only is this a blatant lie by my opponent, but they're holding someone to a standard they don't even have, which makes them a hypocrite.

"My opponent said he has 'never been diagnosd with autism'."
It's very obvious this was a typo and I meant diagnosed, so no, it doesn't mean I have never not been diagnosed with autism. You also are not the one who decides what I meant by my own words. Only I would know what I meant by what I typed, and I meant diagnosed.

"What he failed to add was the part where ViceRegent said 'just kidding'."
This is all lies too. Anyone can go to the debate themselves and ViceRegent never once says "just kidding".

Once again, all my opponent has offered is lies and ad hominem attacks. It should be clear, at this point, who is winning this debate.


Sources:
[2] http://www.debate.org...
[3] http://www.debate.org...
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Capitalistslave 1 year ago
Capitalistslave
Squonk: You're probably right. If they were going to accept, they'd have done so by now I'm sure.
Posted by squonk 1 year ago
squonk
I bet ViceRegent won't accept your debate. Don't think he's never been challenged to prove how he knows truth from fiction before. He'll keep re-posting the "how do atheists rationally know truth from fiction?" over and over again. For all eternity, maybe. Just ignore it.
Posted by Capitalistslave 1 year ago
Capitalistslave
Well, on his profile there are only 64 times he has had this debate, so I was going off of evidence that is available to us.
Posted by MagicAintReal 1 year ago
MagicAintReal
You've grossly understated how many times this guy has had this debate...it's closer to 130 times.
ViceRegent is also a gigantic p*ssy as evidenced by him running away from a debate about macroevolution we had AND by his other name, scmike, who was too scared to accept a debate about god's omnipotence.
F*ck ViceRegent, f*ck him up his stupid a$$.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.