The Instigator
Shrektheboss
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Tough
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

Is it possible that we're living in a computer simulation?

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Tough
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/6/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 536 times Debate No: 79427
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Shrektheboss

Pro

It is a possibility that we are living in a computer simulation.
Tough

Con

It is not possible that we are living in a computer simulation.

If we exist in a computer simulation, we are not alive.

If we are alive, we are in a non-computed environment.
Debate Round No. 1
Shrektheboss

Pro

Shrektheboss forfeited this round.
Tough

Con

Awaiting a response.
Debate Round No. 2
Shrektheboss

Pro

What do you consider "alive"?. If we make a human who's just like us and put them in a generated world with the use of a computer does that make them alive? I think in the future it is a possibility we will be able to make artificial life through a computer. Which also means that we could be computer simulations, made by our future selves to explore and view the past.
Tough

Con

What I consider 'alive' or 'living' is something that is not dead.

To be dead is to be lacking any consciousness, any actual organs and/or aspects of anything else that is alive or living. How about you Pro? Oh that's right, we can never find out because you're out of rounds and brought up a new point in the last round which is not even allowed.

We could be anything, but we could not be both alive and in a computer simulation as that would make us artificial and thus not alive/biological.

One of the 7 aspects of all living things is 'sensitivity' [http://www.oum.ox.ac.uk...] and while the other 6 (movement, reproduction, nutrition excretion respiration and growth) could happen in a computer simulation, we couldn't be conscious or feel real sensitivity within the realms of a computerized form of existence.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by jethro_purazo 2 years ago
jethro_purazo
ShrekthebossToughTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: The Pro doesn't convinced me well in his arguments.
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 2 years ago
tajshar2k
ShrekthebossToughTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited, and didn't even bother properly refuting Con's arguments
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
ShrekthebossToughTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: NOT A VOTEBOMB!!! Conduct to Con due to Pro's Round 2 forfeiture. S&G to Con due to Pro's grammatical errors in R3. Such as multiple punctuation errors. Sources to Con considering that he's the only one who used sources. Arguments to Con as well due to Pro never actually making an argument but more of just asking a few questions and then didn't back up his statement. Con answered these questions in depth and thus I have no choice, but to give this debate to Con.