The Instigator
TruthGen
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
Garbanza
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Pro does not understand this debate

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 3 votes the winner is...
TruthGen
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/9/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 476 times Debate No: 61456
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

TruthGen

Con

Following my proposal in http://www.debate.org...

This is a debate designed to push the boundaries of debates themselves, feel free to be creative.

I say Pro understands this debate. Prove me wrong.
Garbanza

Pro

I understand this debate because I say so and you have the BoP to prove I don't. I can't wait to see you try.
Debate Round No. 1
TruthGen

Con

"I understand this debate because I say so and you have the BoP to prove I don't. I can't wait to see you try."
You are meant to be in favor of "Pro does not understand this debate"
That is, proving you don't understand this debate.
Garbanza

Pro

Just quoting me like that doesn't prove that I don't understand it. It doesn't prove anything.

You haven't met the BoP and there's only one round left.
Debate Round No. 2
TruthGen

Con

Well according to what i previously said in my debate "Debates are meant to be won", the main goal in a debate is to win. In this case Pro has to look like he actually does not understand the debate. But the fact that he acts in this way proves that he is acting motivated by the final reward, which is victory.

In fact, the correct way to "not to understand this debate" is actually to say "I don't understand this debate" because defending "Pro does not understand this debate" would be making yourself lose, thus being more convincing for the voters that you actually don't understand the point (The problem is that, once they notice you lost and because of that you should win, it's too late, and well, making you win would again make them want you to lose and so on)

In a way, you win this debate by losing.

Did you understand?
Garbanza

Pro

My opponent is making no sense at all. He writes convoluted sentences because he wants to trick people into thinking he's proving something when he isn't.

He had the BoP to show that I didn't understand the debate, but I think he's only shown that HE doesn't understand the debate, and that means that I win.
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 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
TruthGenGarbanzaTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: pro only makes assertion and provides no evidence.....of him not understanding the debate
Vote Placed by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
TruthGenGarbanzaTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro immediately contradicted himself by stating he "understood the debate". Pro was to argue FOR "Pro does not understand this debate."
Vote Placed by RainbowDash52 2 years ago
RainbowDash52
TruthGenGarbanzaTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to con because either A: pro accepted a debate which he didn't bother to understand correctly, or B: pro acted deceitfully by acting like he didn't understand the debate even though he did, either way is bad conduct. Con as instigator had BoP, which wasn't met because con only showed that pro's behavior was consistent with one who understood the debate, but didn't show why it couldn't be the case that pro genuinely didn't understand the debate, so there was still reasonable doubt. But since pro failed to discredit any of con's arguments, I can't award either side with more convincing arguments.