The Instigator
Brainmaster
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
phantom
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

My opponent has just lost the game.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 3 votes the winner is...
phantom
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/21/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,058 times Debate No: 17172
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Brainmaster

Pro

Definitions:

The game- A mind game. The rules are:r


-Everyone in the world is playing The Game. (Sometimes narrowed to: "Everybody in the world who knows about The Game is playing The Game",or alternatively, "You are always playing The Game.") A person cannot not play The Game; it does not require consent to play and one can never stop playing.

-Whenever one thinks about The Game, one loses.

-Losses must be announced to at least one person (either by using a statement such as "I Lost The Game" or by alternative means).

By this definiton, my opponent has just lost the game.
phantom

Con

I look forward to having a rigorous philosophical debate! =)


My opponent has not posted all the rules of "the game". Therefore I will do so now. In this link [1] you will find all the rules of the game.

Contention 1:
I did not just lose the game. I actually lost "the game" before I took this debate. If you look at the rules of the game, after you lose the game you have 30 minutes in which you cannot lose the game. So you do not lose the game every time you think about it. You lose the game after you have not been thinking about it for 30 minutes. Since I was thinking about the game before I was even sent this challenge I did not lose the game at the time of accepting this debate. Nor did I lose the game at the time of reading the debate prior to accepting it.
Now It is probable that most people here don't know about these rules and have only just been enlightened. But this is the same game that my opponent is talking about, and the same game that is constantly being brought up in discussion on this website (and who knows where else). Therefore according to the rules I did not just lose the game. My opponent needs to prove that at the time I accepted this debate I lost the game. I have proven otherwise.



Contention 2:

The game does not hold any power. It is completely made up like my opponent says, it is a mind game. I could just as easily make up another game with the following rules: 1. I am always playing this game no matter what unless I wish to stop playing it.
2. While I am playing "this game" I cannot lose "the game".

The game that I made up has just as much power as "the game" and therefore by it's rules I cannot lose "the game". "The game" is completely made up, my game is completely made up as well. They are just the same only with different rules. I do not see why I would not be allowed to make up a mind game like this one, when someone else makes up a game very similar to it.

I have given 2 reasons as too why I did not just lose the game.

Therefore vote con.




[1] http://www.funnycorner.net...
Debate Round No. 1
Brainmaster

Pro

C1. My opponent agreed to the definitions I set when starting this debate- new ones are irrelevant.



C2. You lost the game, regardless of a new game you created.


Vote Pro.
phantom

Con

//My opponent agreed to the definitions I set when starting this debate- new ones are irrelevant.//


My opponent makes a false assertion. I did not accept his rules. In debate you are allowed to argue against definitions. This is what I have done. It is perfectly legal. All I did was add the rules that my opponent forgot to add, or was not aware of.
He also says it is a new definition. This claim is incorrect. I was adding to the definition as my opponent did not fully set out all of the rules. Again this is perfectly legal in debate.


//You lost the game, regardless of a new game you created.//

My opponent does not even make an argument in his second contention. He simply claims that I lost the game regardless of a new game I created. He has made no effort to prove that I am not allowed to create a new game. To prove that I lost the game, he has to prove that my game should not be allowed. He has not done so. In fact when he says "a new game you created", he is admitting that I created the game. If my opponent has no problem with me creating a new game, why am I not allowed to play it?


All my points still stand.


Vote con.
Debate Round No. 2
Brainmaster

Pro

the game

Congrats, you just lost.
phantom

Con

Well this was a disappointment. I thought my opponent would at least put the tiniest amount of effort in, but instead he waits three days to post two sentence arguments.


All my point still stand. My opponent has completely ignored the previous round, therefore extend arguments.


My opponent has disappointingly put no effort into this debate. He has barely made an argument and has ignored most of mine.

Vote con.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
BrainmasterphantomTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro essentially conceded to the two loopholes by phantom.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 5 years ago
BlackVoid
BrainmasterphantomTied
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 basically forfeits in round 3.
Vote Placed by Brenavia 5 years ago
Brenavia
BrainmasterphantomTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: 30 minute rule applies. Con has better understanding of arguments, whilst Pro has better understanding of technicalities.