The Instigator
Varrack
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points
The Contender
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Knowledge Requires Experience

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 2 votes the winner is...
Varrack
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/14/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 529 times Debate No: 75314
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

Varrack

Con

Resolved: Knowledge is always obtained through physical experience

Since vi_spex has made several debates titled "know=physical experience", I challenge him to prove his point. All I need to do to win is to negate the resolution.

Knowledge - awareness of fact or truth.
Experience - physically encountering something.

Pro may begin first.
vi_spex

Pro

know=physical experience=true
knowledge=memory of know=truth

true is the opposite of false and truth, and false is the opposite of truth. truth can only be in the past

Debate Round No. 1
Varrack

Con

Pro states "know=physical experience=true". While I don't contend that knowledge is arguably true, there is no reason to suggest that knowledge is always gained through physical experience.

Pro continues to say that truth is the memory of knowledge...which makes no sense. Pro also says that true is the opposite of false, which is correct but has nothing to do with the resolution. Pro states that truth can only be in the past, which makes no sense either. In fact, Pro hasn't proved anything besides that he can use equal sign.

=Case=

Since the resolution pertains to the absolute, I only need to find one example of knowledge existing without experience as a precursor to succesfully negate.

1. Instincts. Certain animals have instincts that tell that what to do during certain seasons. For example, birds in the northern hemisphere migrate south for the winter and return north when spring comes. They are wired to think this way, and there is no evidence to suggest that birds do this because of physical experience. They simply *know* when to migrate and how to act during different seasons. In this example, experience is not a precursor to knowledge.

2. Identity. People have a sense of identity their entire life. Gender is an example of this, in which people know which gender they belong to. No one can say that they knew that they were a male or female based on their physical experiences, but rather they simply contain the knowledge that they are one or the other. Gender Identity Disorder[1] is a good example of how physical experience does not come into play because of the inherent knowledge that one's self is male or female. While bodily experience suggests otherwise, people know which category they belong to.

Those are just some examples, but they're enough to negate the resolution.

[1] http://tinyurl.com...
vi_spex

Pro

know is true, knowledge is truth, opposite

truth is knowledge, is memory of know..

knowledge is non sense

sense=physical experience
Debate Round No. 2
Varrack

Con

Pro has dropped both my examples and repeats the same gibberish. Extend them.

"knowledge is non sense
sense=physical experience"

This is a concession. Pro should be arguing that knowledge requires experience (know=experience), but instead admits they are inherently different. To say that knowledge is nonsense is also contradictory to the earlier statement, know=true.
vi_spex

Pro

know is the opposite of and the balancing point between belief and knowledge, and belief is the opposite of knowledge, knowledge is truth, truth is the opposite of false, and truth can only be in the past

to learn how to fly a bird has to first fall

sense=physical experience

knowledge is a subset of know, and belief is a subset of knowledge, as my perception of future is shaped with information from the past
Debate Round No. 3
Varrack

Con

I have successfully showed instances in which knowledge does not require physical experience to exist or be obtained. Pro hasn't refuted these, so the resolution remains negated.

To say "to learn how to fly a bird has to first fall" shows that knowledge can be gained through experience, but this is irrelevant because the resolution pertains to the absolute, so Pro should be arguing that it always does.

Vote Con.
vi_spex

Pro

you are making claims.. by default you havnt proved anything


Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
there simple can be no awarness of previus awarness without awarness.. how could you have knowledge of what happend yesterday if you were sound asleep all day?
Posted by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
@FYI, "Knowledge Requires Experience" can be shortened to "Epistemological Empiricism".
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
intelligence+stupidity=mistake
Posted by Varrack 2 years ago
Varrack
No, you are the one making claims.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
future=unknown

maybe some one grab it and it never fell down
Posted by canis 2 years ago
canis
No. I know the apple on the tree will fall down soner or later. Yes I have seen 3 apples fall down after some time..
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Cowboy0108 2 years ago
Cowboy0108
Varrackvi_spexTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: con laid out his points more clearly and actually seemed to care about the debate.
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 2 years ago
tajshar2k
Varrackvi_spexTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to refute Con's case. He continued to repeat what he said in previous rounds again. Pro's spelling was terrible, and Con only used sources.