It is a beneficial strategy to accept some unsubstantiated beliefs
Debate Rounds (5)
No particual rules; I think that the title is clear enough but please ask questions in the comments if you need clarification.
Somtimes in life yes means yes and no means no even if the rapist has no substantiation of the objectivity of linguistic deifnition.
I what you who!?
"Sometimes in life yes means yes and no means no" is a truism.
I've spent a little time staring vacuously at the rest of your sentence and I can find no more intelligable meaning there than in the first half of the sentence.
The closest I can get to, after much reflection, is that you are making the following point:
Believing that words have a certain meaning fits the bill.
It is a beneficial strategy to believe that certain words have certain meanings.
This is an unsubstantiated belief.
Am I right? If so, could I beg you to express yourself more plainly in the future? If I'm wrong, could I beg you to express yourself more plainly in the future?
If I am right, I must most soundly rebutt the idea on the grounds that we have plenty sufficient evidence that certain words do convey certain meanings to certain people.
Sure, you need a receiver... I mean, "potato" doesn't mean anything, per se... but it does mean something to you, as I believed that it would, and that's all that's going on here.
That example will not do, do you have any others?
I have offered argument, my opponent has offered nothing but confusion and distorted rape to be okay if you choos eto hear 'yes' as no' as really the beliefs that rape is wrong and no means no are unsubstantiated.
Enjoy prison and ruining that woman/man's life, it really will look good on your CV!
It sounds like I was half right in my interpretation of your very unclear explanation.
I finally understand unambiguously what you mean when you say:
"The beliefs that rape is wrong and 'no' means 'no' are unsubstantiated"
So, you are making two claims at a win through four implied statements:
1. a) Believing that rape is wrong is beneficial
1. b) Believing that rape is wrong is unsubstantiated
2. a) Believing that "no" means "no" is beneficial
2. b) Believing that "no" means "no" is unsubstantiated
I've already refuted your second claim but I'll do so again: The fact that we can have this converstation and the gentle voters can follow along is evidence enough to justify belief that "no" has a shared meaning understood by speakers of English that allow us to infer meaning from others' writings and to imply meanings in our own.
I'm going to take a cheap pop; sorry, I can't help myself... you said:
- you choos eto hear 'yes' as no'
And you were referring to the act of rape. I think that you meant to say:
- you choose to hear 'no' as 'yes'
I wonder whether Pro takes seriously their proposition that "no might not mean no"!
Anyhow... believing that rape is wrong; I can tell you that I think that rape is wrong. I agree that believing that rape is wrong is a beneficial belief. However, I don't see how you could argue that it is unsubstantiated!
Unsubstantiated is defined as:
Not supported (or proven) by evidence.
And evidence is defined as:
The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
I offer my evidence that rape is wrong: The millions of people who have suffered emotional trauma, unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases... and all of the children who had emotionally damaged lives as a result of being children of rape whose own mothers couldn't look at them without being reminded of the rape.
Pro, this idea will not do. Do you have any others?
Your parents must be proud of your ability to Bullsh**.
Perhaps I should have specified literacy, dignity and sticking to the topic.
I was hoping for a debate but you've ruined it.
At least give me something interesting to tackle for the last round, if you are smart enough for the task.
I forfeit this debate. Sometimes it's beneficial to accept an unsubstantiated loss because the nerd debating you is just too much of a tryhard to accept he is BSing.
Why did you take the debate on if you weren't prepared to put up a good fight?
If you think this is fighting you must have never been beaten up, oh wait you were because you are a nerd.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Chaosism 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con for Pro's ad hominem remarks. Arguments to Con; Pro had few arguments and forfeited.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.