Life is a paradox
Debate Rounds (4)
(I saw this topic being debated earlier, and felt like giving it a go myself) http://www.debate.org...
Life: What people experience from birth to death.
Paradox: Contrary to expectations, existing belief or perceived opinion.
I will be taking the pro side of debate. My task will be to make a convincing and coherent argument in favor of the resolution
"life is a paradox"
Cons task will be to either poke holes in my argument or make a more convincing argument that expresses why life is not a paradox, or both.
R2 opening arguments
R4 closing statements
Good luck to my opponent
life=sensory experience, as im dead without my sense
The idea to be emphasized in this debate will be experience. Life has pretty long list of definitions, from the biological processes to lifestyle. My argument will be focused on what is being experienced. That is why it is defined as it is above,
When we examine opposites and consider what they represent it's safe to say that one denies the others reality. They cannot co-exist- atleast not at the same time.
wet & dry: Nothing can be wet and dry at the same time.
hot & cold: Nothing can be hot and cold at the same time.
up & down: nothing can go up and down at the same time. When something is going up it is impossible for it to be going down as long as its going up.
life & death: Is it possible to be both alive and dead at the same time? Impossible.
However, when we examine experience and consider what is actually taking place it's easy to make a paradoxical connection. It appears that on the level of experience both life & death appear to be happening at once.
From the moment of conception when the sperm meets the egg (fertilization) thus producing an embryo, the process of death is set into motion, not life. While it appears that a newly born person is alive and growing and learning,"living" and it is in many respects. But, it is also aging, everyday is an advance on the inevitable, the inescapable, the thing that cannot be avoided, death.
life is, not was or will be
i can have a stick that is on fire on one end and with the other end solidly placed in an ice blok. i can have a dry rock with a drop of water on it..
life is transformation, death is turn my back.
It appears that con has no opening argument and fails to point out any flaws in my argument, thus leaving me nothing to rebut.
I'll just use this round to further clarify my argument.
Most people (including myself) have the experience of being "alive" by interacting and responding to the world we live in. We learn, grow, get stronger and wiser. All of this can be characterized as "life". But, the fact of the matter is that the body through which these experiences take place is aging and getting weaker everyday, it's dying. While at times it may appear to be getting stronger the period is short lived and the body consistently advances towards death. Which is precisely why that life as defined in R1 'What people experience from birth to death' is a paradox. People have experiences through the body that is often regarded as "life", but yet it is this same body that is ultimately destined to reach death. That is what makes it a paradox, we seem to be experiencing both life and death at the same time.
Back to con
you are dead without your senses, without sense you cant eat food, or do anything..
as i said, life is transformation, not creation and not destruction
Again con fails to argue or counter my argument, and fails to bring forth anything to strengthen their side of the debate. I extend my argument.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Biodome 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:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Con did a laughable job at refuting Pro's arguments, neither did he supply a good case of his own. Con's sentences were neither coherent, nor logical in any way. While I personally don't agree with Pro's position and would gladly argue against him, I must confess that his argument was clearly better structured and convincing than Con's.
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.