The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
11 Points

It is impossible to move backwards mentally

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/11/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,123 times Debate No: 15309
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)




I would like to let my opponent go first, good luck to whoever accepts.


I thank my opponent for such a debate!

Now considering the resolution, and the fact that my opponent has allowed me to go first; I will contend that it is entirely possible to move backwards mentally. However since I am the Contender but am making the initial constructive, I will first to frame the Debate; so that we can actually debate it.

Now let's analize what this topic is asking us to debate. Impossible indicates that moving backwards mentally is not ever a possibility. Move Backwards can mean anything from Mental deterioration, to ideological dissention. Finally mental indicates of, or relating to the mind.

Now since I will be having one more speech than my opponent I will make my arguments here simple and brief

First, we can move backwards mentally through mental deterioration. Whether or not you want to consider Alzhiemers, Mental retardation through head trauma, or Losing mental capability through the usage of illicit drugs and substances destroying the human mind. The impact here is that one of reasons we can move backwards mentally is through mental deterioration.

Second, Ideological dissention. When people hold a common ideal which they live by, it allows them to progress their society (whether in ways positive or negative) however when this dissention occurs progress dies and they move backwards mentally in this regard.

Third, taking a class below ones level can cause a person to move backwards mentally. For instance after a freshman's first year in high school they take algerba 1. During their sophmore year they take Algebra 2. However during their junior and senior year they take math models. now considering this individual actually understood the content in their classes, taking such a low level class will cause them to stop growing mentall, and even forget the algebra they learned in their first two years of high school.

So in closing, we see that it is possible to move backwards mentally.

Back to you Pro!
Debate Round No. 1


I thank Con for accepting my challenge!

For the sake of keeping the debate a reasonable length, I'm only going to address two of con's arguments. If you would like me to address the third, I would gladly do so in the next round!

I'd like to start by addressing con's first argument:

When one loses memory through any manner of occurrences, such as mental deterioration, your mind isn't necessarily moving backwards, it is moving forward, but with a new set of information. I say this because just like all other things in the universe, your mental state is governed by the laws of time. Also, moving back or regressing would mean you would go back to exactly how you were at that first point. It isn't true regression if you have mental deterioration because you may have lost a lot of memory, but because you are constantly moving forward in time, you will be taking in new information all the time. From my knowledge, it's impossible to lost 100% of the information you take in on a daily basis while remaining alive (I may be wrong), thus you cannot totally digress or move backward mentally.

Next, to address con's argument on Ideological Dissention:

I would like to bring up the Dark Ages for this section of the argument.

The Dark Ages were a period of time in Europe where no societal progress was made, and a lot of knowledge was lost to the world. During this time, the members of the christian church rejected the ideas of the Romans because their ideas were Pagan.

From our perspective of the period, a lot of moving backwards took place. This is the case because we are comparing our current societal progress to the societal progress of the era. What we may consider progress at this point would be the advances of medicine, technology, etc.

It's probably very true that progress in that sense did not occur, but in it's place, spiritual growth took place. New religious ideas were formed during the time, churches were built, etc. There may have been a digression of a certain aspects of their society, but it would've been impossible for total digression to take place.


I thank opponent for their refutations.

Now before I get into the Pro constructive, I would like to point out that my opponent had no viable reason for not attacking my third point. If he so desires he may attack it in his next speech, but if he doesn't you must count it as a drop and the Con will win.

Now onto my rebuttals.

First my opponent makes the claim that when you undergo any manner of mental deterioration that you are not moving backwards. you are just moving forward with a new set of information. This is completely ridiculous, the deterioration clause mandates that you are indeed moving backwards. There are no positive impacts to mandate any kind of growth.

When there is any kind of loss you must count this as moving backwards; if there had never been any kind of loss the gains would have still occurred. Also my opponent changes their stance towards the end of their refutations, instead of saying that mental regression is impossible they now contend that it is just less frequent. For this my opponent concedes that even to the smallest degree it happens; Thus I win.
Now going on to ideological dissension.

My opponent does not cover my arguments here. In fact, his arguments if anything strengthen my stance, there was mental regression. Even if in only in a fleeting sense it existed. Thus I win still

Again, no attack was made on contention 3.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2


lliwill forfeited this round.


My opponent has forfeited. Please extend all my previous arguments. :3
Debate Round No. 3


lliwill forfeited this round.


My opponent has forfeited again, please vote Con :3
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Robikan 5 years ago
I agree, you need to either go first to present a clear argument, or you need to edit your first post to include definitions. As it stands, it is very unclear what you are wanting to debate or what your position is.
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 5 years ago
I may accept this later.
Posted by Itsallovernow 5 years ago
You need to go first! Not enoug information to create an argument.
Posted by J.Kenyon 5 years ago
Posted by Koopin 5 years ago
Posted by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Definitions are needed. Like are you talking about individually or as a society? And are you referring to social progress or simply knowledge.
Posted by Zealous1 5 years ago
It is impossible to tell what you mean by this resolution.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 5 years ago
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 left it to Con to define the terms of the debate, and Con defined "move backwards" in a reasonable way the Pro could not overcome. Hope for Pro would have had to have been through an unusual definition, which he didn't advance at th start. Forfeiting loses conduct. Con would have been better off giving specific examples with references early in the debate, but ended up not needing references.
Vote Placed by TUF 5 years ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Vie forfeit.