The Instigator
elgeibo
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

My Opponent Does Not Exist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 5 votes the winner is...
Logical-Master
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/21/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,132 times Debate No: 6598
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (5)

 

elgeibo

Pro

This is fairly simple I think. My opponent must prove that he/she/it exists. My opponent must prove they exist, so, the burden of proof rests with the fictitious and shady character. My opponent may try many crazy stunts (much the way a cartoon character does) to prove his/her/its existence, but do not be fooled, I will make sure my "opponent" is brought into the light of truth!
Logical-Master

Con

Almost forgot about this debate . . .

First of all, I would like to thank my opponent for starting this debate and shall already congratulate him on winning the votes that shall no doubt be provided by the "not saying" population. With that said, let us proceed carefully.

======================
Burden of Proof |
======================

My opponent seems to believe that I hold the burden of proof for some reason, thus, I shall first clarify on why he is incorrect regarding this matter. We must keep in mind that the burden of proof belongs to the side that INITIATES a claim.

EXAMPLE: Lets say that a man walks into a bar and claims that gravity does not exist. Let us further say that individuals in the bar turn around and question the man and ask that he provide evidence to show that gravity does not exist. Now, by my opponent's logic (or lack of rather), it would be most reasonable for the man to say something along the lines of "Ha ha. I don't have to prove anything. It's your job to prove it exist and I am right until you show otherwise."

Hence, I believe my point has been made. Indeed . . . for as far as debating goes, the one who "smelt it dealt it." In other words: If you're going to make a claim, back it up.

=======================
Evidence to support my existence |
=======================

Given what I've stated above, I could very well end this round immediately and insist that it be my opponent to make the first move rather than walk into whatever trap he feels overly confident about having set. However, to pacify my opponent, I shall go the extra mile and support my stance immediately.

My argument is simple:

All ideas exist.
At the very least, Logical-Master can be regarded as an idea.
Therefore, Logical-Master exist.

Clarification on Premise #1: As V said in V for Vendetta, "Ideas are bullet proof." This is relatively simple ladies and gentlemen. Whether or not we live in the "Matrix" or we are simple part of a "dream", ideas remain unaffected in terms of existence; nothing can harm an idea. Indeed as ideas transcend across all plains of "reality". For example, let us take into consideration the fictional character known as Huckle Berry Finn. Whereas he would usually be argued as physically non existent, he still exist as a concept/idea. An idea merely needs to have been imagined to exist. Even if the source of the idea is possible false, the idea itself remains unaffected.

This above premise may need some clarification depending on what PRO states in the following round.

Clarification on Premise #2: Given that I have already entered my opponent's imagination (he already acknowledged me as we an see from the title of this debate), I no doubt have a cause even if I were to have been spawned into existence when this debate had been started. Nevertheless, I have no idea what PRO intends to argue, thus, I shall say no more on this one for the time being and shall wait for an objection.

Thus, it is most reasonable to conclude that due to both of these premises, I exist at very least as an idea.

======================
Alternate approach on the topic |
======================

Of course, looking at the topic a bit differently, we must note that my opponent is advocating that I DO NOT exist. Hence, what is to stop me from augmenting his burden an arguing from the position that I MIGHT NOT exist? Indeed as it would seem rather reasonable to conclude that there's a means of determining that I do not exist. Clearly, insisting mere possibility (i.e . "might not") is more reasonable.

And that'll do it for now . . .
Debate Round No. 1
elgeibo

Pro

My opponents have done a good job of clouding your mind dear readers. My opponents try know that they are not fooling any of us, for they attempt first to show that "Logic Master" is an idea and as that idea exists, so does "Logic Master".

My opponents believes that the movie V for Vendetta proves their point. Does it? When V is speaking of the idea that ideas are bullet proof, is speaking of after his own death. V is speaking that what he represented will continue to exist long after he himself is gone. The people behind the puppet of "Logic Master" are attempting to prove his existence by a flawed analogy to movie. Though, I will concede that ideas exist, and I'm sure that "Logic Master" was conjured up out of someones rectal area, there is not a singular person to whom the avatar of "Logic Master" belongs.

Of course, if my opponents seek to win via semantics, they already know they have lost.

My name is Jonathan, I am from Tennessee, I own an insurance agency. I have a social security number, I have a business license number, and I have several (unfortunately high) bills in my name every month. "Logic Master" can claim also to have these things, but my opponents who have created this phantasm can not claim the same for the character they say exists.

The person hood of "Logic Master" is what I call into question. Where are "Logic Master"'s parents? I'm sure names can be conjured for them as well. Does "Logic Master" have a job, or friends, or anyone that can actually claim to know "Logic Master"? Of course not! "Logic Master" is obviously a front set up by a group of people to try to sway us towards "his" conservative agendas.

My opponents are going to continue to give examples of "Logic Master" living in the real world. These shadows have entire backgrounds on "Logic Master" in case his person hood was ever called into question. They will attempt to sow seeds of truth in their fields of lies. You readers are better than to fall for such simple lies. You have proven over and over that you are smarter than to believe the word of "Logic Master" and "his" handlers.

We all defy you, "Logic Master", to poison our brains with your deceptions.
Logical-Master

Con

------>"RE:My opponents believes that the movie V for Vendetta proves their point. Does it? When V is speaking of the idea that ideas are bullet proof, is speaking of after his own death. V is speaking that what he represented will continue to exist long after he himself is gone. The people behind the puppet of "Logic Master" are attempting to prove his existence by a flawed analogy to movie. Though, I will concede that ideas exist, and I'm sure that "Logic Master" was conjured up out of someones rectal area, there is not a singular person to whom the avatar of "Logic Master" belongs."

False. I merely used the film V for Vendetta to elaborate on my message and that is that an idea in definite. One cannot take away its existence. Given that my opponent concedes to ideas existing and that I am an idea, he has essentially agreed with my stance. Even if I am merely being controlled by a group of people, this does not negate my existence as an idea.

------>"RE:Of course, if my opponents seek to win via semantics, they already know they have lost."

How can I have the ability to know I've lost if I don't even exist? Why is it that my opponent keeps acknowledging me? ;)

------->RE:"The person hood of "Logic Master" is what I call into question. Where are "Logic Master"'s parents? I'm sure names can be conjured for them as well. Does "Logic Master" have a job, or friends, or anyone that can actually claim to know "Logic Master"? Of course not! "Logic Master" is obviously a front set up by a group of people to try to sway us towards "his" conservative agendas."

The person hood of "elgeibo" is what I call into question. Where are "elgeibo"'s parents? I'm sure names can be conjured for them as well. Does "elgeibo" have a job, or friends, or anyone that can actually claim to know "elgeibo"? Of course not! "Elgeibo" is obviously a front set up by a group of people to try to sway us towards "his" liberal agendas

Of course, even with the same being said about the both of us, this still doesn't dispel the notion that we are ideas at the very least. Hence, our "existence" per se is confirmed regardless.

---->RE:"We all defy you, "Logic Master", to poison our brains with your deceptions."

My opponent has slipped up and revealed the truth (seemingly by accident). Notice how he uses the word "we" when this debate is supposedly between the two of us. Why would he do that? I'll tell you. Because it is not I who is merely a group of people who have an agenda. Rather, it is MY OPPONENT; PRO has been projecting. Indeed, my opponent is merely nothing more than a group of people who are agents of the secret organization known as "the balance."

Is this a conspiracy? Or the truth that's so obvious you'd never believe it? You tell me . . .

Debate.org serves two purposes. On the surface, it appears to be an Internet debate website for information relating politics, society, entertainment, philosophy, relgion, and miscellaneous topics. But in actuality, the site itself plays a far more important role in your life than you've been allowed to realize.

You see, this website is actually a mental prison operated by an unknown society known as, "The Balance", and you are a convicted felon and mental prisoner of the facility.

You must understand, in society, and in daily life, there must always exist a balance of ideas being represented among the people. If the voices of one ideology become too strong or too loud, the balance is lost and one group may choose to exploit that lack of equality by forcing their ideas on society, simply because they control the power of the majority. When incidents like this take place, it often leads to civil violence, uprisings, and oppression of the minorities. You may not realize it yet, but you are exactly the type of person who causes these things to happen. You are confident, outspoken, not afraid to address the issues, and more convinced than not that your worldview is correct.

As a result, people like you must be silenced for the sake of preserving the balance. If you were allowed to run free in society expressing your views as strongly as you express them here, you would begin a chain reaction of ideas that would ultimately tip the scales of power in your preferred direction, which would cause divisions and potential violence in society that otherwise would never have happened.

To prevent this from occurring, "The Balance" has mentally confined you to this website as a mental prisoner without you realizing it. All day long, agents of "The Balance" interact with you in daily life, filling your head with subconscious suggestions that inevitably lead you back to where you are at this VERY moment - sitting at a computer reading these messages. The suggestions are subtle. Anyone around you at any given moment could be an agent of "The Balance", making a casual comment about a politics here, making a statement about religion there, or perhaps they are a stranger who strikes up a conversation with you while waiting in line at the grocery store. Agents of "The Balance" are charged to influence you to return here again, and again, and again to debate the issues. So long as your beliefs and thoughts are being expressed in this place, to mostly the same group of posters on a daily level, you are not infecting society and upsetting the balance of represented ideas in the actual world.

Don't be offended. Your mind is so great, and your thoughts are so strong that secret societies are required to prevent you from destroying all other societies. You must be influenced to return here to express your thoughts on politics and religion, because if you expressed them elsewhere just as frequently, you could singlehandedly start wars. Its called Chaos Theory - that your one thought, passed to someone else, spreads and grows until it becomes many thoughts, and those many thoughts upset the balance of represented ideas until mass violence becomes the inevitable result.

So you are a convicted felon serving an indefinite mental sentence in this virtual prison that masquerades as a debate website. You will return here to post your thoughts about religion and politics because they are too dangerous for the outside world. You have been subconsciously isolated from society for the sake of all societies. Of course you talk about some of your discussions and concerns away from this site, but the strongest of your thoughts are siphoned into this virtual vacuum which prevents you from upsetting the balance.

If you have made it to this sentence, that's a few more minutes you've spent serving time rather than threatening society. Indeed, even in this debate, the balance have sent several agents to pose under the name of this individual who calls himself elgeibo. The reason he is so gung ho to claim that I do not exist is because he is onto me and my ideas and he is well aware of the threat I pose to his corrupt organization. Thus, he seeks to silence you all the idea that I don't exist and that I am merely puppet. Do not be fooled debate.org. The truth MUST BE REVEALED

That aside, let us keep in mind that PRO has agreed that I am an idea and concedes that ideas exist. If you don't manage to see through his true goals on this debate website. At very least, you should be able to see this and agree that I am the victor of this debate.
Debate Round No. 2
elgeibo

Pro

elgeibo forfeited this round.
Logical-Master

Con

Upon exposing my opponent's propaganda and organization for what it is, he has clearly fled not knowing what to tell his superiors for his failure.

That and as suggested in the previous round, my opponent conceded that ideas existed and that I was an idea. Thus, it is rather clear as to who has won this debate.

I thank my opponent for the debate and the one or two people who have/will actually bothered/bother reading the debate.

Later. :D
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Shes_Electric 5 years ago
Shes_Electric
Just at the end, but it is refreshing.

No hard feelings. I do love sarcasm.
Posted by Logical-Master 5 years ago
Logical-Master
Es cool. Sorry if I came off as rude in my comment.
Posted by Shes_Electric 5 years ago
Shes_Electric
Oh, and my comment was super awesome and makes your eyes feel like they are flying.

Don't deny it! ;)
Posted by Shes_Electric 5 years ago
Shes_Electric
I'm sorry, Logical-Master. I, should have use "The Instigator" rather than "he" in my comment.

I was in no way referring to you.
Posted by Logical-Master 5 years ago
Logical-Master
"How could a debate be initiated with a phantom? With a "thing" that does not exist?"

Which one of us are you referring to as I don't remember suggesting anything along those lines.

"I believe he intended to be more metaphorical with his debate."

Not too sure if he had a previous intention given that there was nada in his first round for me to work with.

"Unfortunately, this website is no such place for imagination or poetry in debate. It is merely a place for facts and an abuse of logic techniques.

You're more than free to point out where I've "abused" these logic techniques you speak of as I am quite curious.

"BOOOOORING!"

Yes, your post wasn't too appeasing to my eyes. Of course, vague posts tend to do that.

Look forward to further discussion. Heck, put this in the form of a debate if you don't mind. :D
Posted by Shes_Electric 5 years ago
Shes_Electric
This is entirely ridiculous.

How could a debate be initiated with a phantom? With a "thing" that does not exist?

The Instigator, had he intended to be THAT literal, would have lost upon submitting this debate.

I believe he intended to be more metaphorical with his debate. Unfortunately, this website is no such place for imagination or poetry in debate. It is merely a place for facts and an abuse of logic techniques.

BOOOOORING!
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 5 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Logcal-Master must exist in space and time.

Else he would be nowhere, and nowhen, and therefore slime.
Posted by Logical-Master 5 years ago
Logical-Master
Me? This argument has been in my head for a couple of months now. In fact, I wasn't even aware that others had come up with it.
Posted by FalseReality 5 years ago
FalseReality
Copy cat
Posted by Logical-Master 5 years ago
Logical-Master
edit: On the lat part, it should say that "it is rather unreasonable."
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Epicism 5 years ago
Epicism
elgeiboLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:04 
Vote Placed by Lampshade 5 years ago
Lampshade
elgeiboLogical-MasterTied
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 
Vote Placed by Mdal 5 years ago
Mdal
elgeiboLogical-MasterTied
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 
Vote Placed by DeadLeaves93 5 years ago
DeadLeaves93
elgeiboLogical-MasterTied
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 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 5 years ago
Logical-Master
elgeiboLogical-MasterTied
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:70