The Instigator
faraecho
Pro (for)
Tied
14 Points
The Contender
Volkov
Con (against)
Tied
14 Points

In Lala land...

Do you like this debate?NoYes-4
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 4 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/3/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,222 times Debate No: 8521
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (4)

 

faraecho

Pro

In Lala Land there is a secret group of mystical monkeys that are evil. There are pink, blue, and orange ones. They seem innocent because of these colors. My friend believes that this secret society of monkeys also contain black monkeys that you can definitely tell are evil. I do not think this is so because the secret of the mystical monkeys that are evil is that they do not seem evil because they are pink, blue, and orange. If there were also black, evil monkeys we would know that were evil and therefore not be secretly evil, and mystical anymore.
Volkov

Con

My opponent states that in Lala Land, all monkeys are of different colours ranging from pink to black, and that all are evil. But because you can tell the black monkeys are evil, it therefore takes away from the secretive, mystical nature of the evil monkies.

I disagree, because the black monkeys may just be a decoy to fool any of us who dream about Lala Land, so we automatically suspect the black monkeys and not the pink, blue and orange monkies. By fooling us into this stereotypical assumption driven trap, we do not suspect the other monkies, only the black ones - making them all the more dangerous and secretive, therefore negating my opponent's argument.

I would also like to point out two definitions:

mystical: having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence.
(http://www.merriam-webster.com...)

Lala Land: a euphoric dreamlike mental state detached from the harsher realities of life
(http://www.merriam-webster.com...)

The two definitions I have provided show that "mystical" is not apparent to the senses or obvious to the intelligence, which coincides with the dreamlike mental state of Lala Land. Therefore, no matter what, Lala Land and all its inhabitants, including the evil mystical monkeys, are mystical, no matter what the status of their colour or personality.

I look forward to my opponent's rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 1
faraecho

Pro

My first point is this. How do you know what is inside MY Lala land?

My second point is that everyone in Lala land knows that monkeys are evil. The black monkeys cannot possible exist because that would give away the whole secretive thing. My definition of mystical is magical which means that these monkeys have powers that will kill anyone that comes to close to them. Besides, if there were black monkeys they would not be smart enough to use magical skills because the pink, orange, blue, and green monkeys get their magic from their fur. (The shade of fur produces a certain type of magical...glitter? and that is where their magical powers is derived from). The shade black won't produce any glittery magic because the fur can't collect the magic from the sun (that's where the monkeys get their magic from besides the glitter but that is also where the glitter comes from).

My third point is that the monkeys are all dead because my friend shot them with a wind gun and this whole debate doesn't matter anyway.
Volkov

Con

I thank my opponent for posting so quickly.

"My first point is this. How do you know what is inside MY Lala land?"

You stated as such.

"My second point is that everyone in Lala land knows that monkeys are evil. The black monkeys cannot possible exist because that would give away the whole secretive thing."

That is a contradiction in terms, but as I already stated above the black monkeys can still exist and not give away any secretive stance of the rest of the monkeys.

My opponent then goes on about the properties of monkey fur, and how it relates into this but. Unfortunately though, she has failed to address any of my contentions, nor has she proven that black monkeys - as non-magical as they may be - are not indeed a ploy in order to distract us and send us after the wrong monkeys, while the other evil monkeys secretly move close and kill us.

"My third point is that the monkeys are all dead because my friend shot them with a wind gun and this whole debate doesn't matter anyway."

Unfortunately the debate still matters, as it is a discussion of historical or imaginative merits. Your friend may have shot the monkeys, but it does not mean that we cannot debate about their culture and properties as it would have been if they were alive. If what my opponent stated as true, then any anthropological or historical discussion would be void - they're all dead, so what does it matter?" That totally misses the reasons behind knowledge and debate

Once again, my opponent failed to address any contentions and let my argument go unanswered. Clearly this proves that I am right, and black monkeys do not give away the secretive, mystical nature of the multi-coloured monkeys in Lala Land.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by faraecho 7 years ago
faraecho
i don't knowwhat that word means so...i'm justgoigto ignore you!!!

nevermind ido knowwhat tht wordmeans my kyboari still screwing upas you can tel in the levay commets....debatecommentsthingies screw it!!

no it'snot!

prove it.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
This debate is a disgrace in terms of voting.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
What is this?
Posted by faraecho 7 years ago
faraecho
no it wasn't it entertained me for about six days
Posted by Killer542 7 years ago
Killer542
well, that was pointless...
Posted by faraecho 7 years ago
faraecho
i can't vote...how did i vote for myself?
Posted by FlashFire 7 years ago
FlashFire
Wow......they each voted for themselves.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
Why?
Posted by PoeJoe 7 years ago
PoeJoe
Huh?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by brycef 7 years ago
brycef
faraechoVolkovTied
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 Ruperttheg 7 years ago
Ruperttheg
faraechoVolkovTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
faraechoVolkovTied
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 Volkov 7 years ago
Volkov
faraechoVolkovTied
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