The Instigator
Illegalcombatant
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
FREEDO
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Pro is a Fool

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...
FREEDO
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/4/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,498 times Debate No: 16865
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

Illegalcombatant

Pro

Definitions

Pro = The instigator of this debate, known as Illegalcombatant on DDO.

Fool = A silly or stupid person; a person who lacks judgment or sense

I will now provide reasons in support of Illegalcombatant is indeed a fool.

R1) Creating a debate where you have to support you are a fool is exactly what a fool would do, and that's exactly what Illegalcombatant is doing.

R2) "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." [1]

Illegalcombatant has said there is no God, ergo is a fool

R3) Illegalcombatant so far has referred to themselves in the third person, exactly what a fool would do

R4)

R5) Illegalcombant left R4 blank, what a fool !!!

R6) Illegalcombant isn't really thinking these reasons through, ergo is a fool.

R7) Illegalcombatant is STILL referring to themselves in the third person, not only is it foolish, its getting a bit annoying.....

R8) Dog food tastes just like it smells........ DELICIOUS !!!

R9) R8 is not relevant to this debate

I think we have good reason to support that Pro/Illegalcombatant is a fool.

I look forward to Cons stupid, pointless and wrong argument, as I can't possibly lose this debate.

Sources

[1] http://www.biblegateway.com...
FREEDO

Con

Glad to take up another debate with Illegalcombatant.

1) All of Pro's points, even his supposedly random or silly ones, have been made with good and calculated intent at winning this debate. A fool would not. Ergo, Pro is not a fool.

2) Pro has won debates[1]. A fool would not be able to win debates. Ergo, Pro is not a fool.

3) The fact that I have better arguments in this debate is not an indicator that Pro is a fool.

4) Even if Pro acted foolishly, that does not mean he is a fool. I could write a whole debate in Spanish but that alone would not prove that I can't speak English.

5) If I were to take this debate it's semantical limits, which I don't particularly need to, someone who "lacks judgement or sense" would be incapable of using a computer. This was included in the definition of fool. Pro is using a computer. Ergo, Pro is not a fool.

Sources:
1. http://www.debate.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Illegalcombatant

Pro

Illegalcombatant mocks Cons arguments, Freedo is just soooooooooo STOOOOOPID.

Con the idiot claims that a fool can't win a debate nor can a fool use a computer. Con has nothing to back this up but their own assertions. Illegal combatant is a fool and its looks like Freddo is as well. A fool can't win a debate eh ?, a fool can't use a computer eh ? I present clear irrefutable evidence that this claim is false.......... http://www.debate.org...

With Cons foolish arguments shown foolish, lets look at the REAL evidence.

R10) Illegalcombatant in the last round said "I look forward to Cons stupid, pointless and wrong argument, as I can't possibly lose this debate." Only a fool would set them self up to fall and thus be ridiculed

R11) Illegal combatant acted foolishly by posting in Freedo profile telling them to hurry up, only just after Freedo had accepted the debate. [1]

R12) Illegalcombatant is STILL referring to them self in the third person........ seriously what is this guys problem ?

R14) Illegalcombatant missed R13)

R15) Illegalcombatant has acted in a very poor manner, thus diminishing their chance of winning the debate, only a fool would do that.

R16) This debate is silly, the creator of this debate is silly, participating in this debate is silly, thus Pro is a fool. "Fool = A silly or stupid person; a person who lacks judgment or sense".

Now ladies and gentlemen of the supposed jury, if this, and all of this is not enough to convince that the resolution is affirmed, I have one last point to make, one irrefutable argument that confirms beyond a shadow of a doubt that Illegal combatant is a fool and the argument is this, if you vote for Freedo, this means that Illegalcombatant wasn't able to convince you that they were a fool, despite the foolishness evident to all, if your going to vote for Freedo, Illegal combatant wasn't able to win a debate affirming their own foolishness ? This ladies and gentlebags is the most damming evidence of it all.

Vote Pro..........or realize that Pro wasn't able to win this argument and thus is a fool and therefore.........Vote Pro.

Sources

[1] http://www.debate.org...
FREEDO

Con

6) Argument 1 is affirmed since Pro has continued trying to win this debate, though through increased silliness. Unfortunately for him, anything other than posting gibberish or something of a similar nature would show that he is making a move which requires a higher intelligence than that of a fool.

7) Pro's first "irrefutable evidence", though refutable, is actually quite a brilliant argument. Which is why it's refutable. lol. Ergo, he is not a fool.

8) <------- It's a smiley face!

9) What, he can be silly in the debate but I can't? Up yours!

10) Pro's last "irrefutable evidence" has already been dismissed. It is a common fallacy advanced by most people; a non sequitur. It does not follow that if Pro has less effective arguments in this debate that he is in-fact a fool.

Conclusion:

Pro has not properly established that he is a fool. Above all, I think he has made a wise decision by instigating a light-hearted debate. This world will begin solving it's problems the day it stops taking itself so seriously. =)
Debate Round No. 2
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Jibby_page 5 years ago
Jibby_page
Kudos to Freedo on a really well crafted victory. He actually did prove to others and to Pro himself , that Pro was not a fool. That's something which can be considered as genuine concern, almost charity. Ironically enough, Pro won, if you look at the bigger picture, that is, beyond the portals of this debate. Would love to debate Freedo sometime myself.
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
well, PRO was a fool, thinking that he could expect to win the debate with silly arguments and a silly resolution.
But that doesn't mean that CON's arguments were not convincing. In fact, she hammered away PRO's claims very well. Sadly, despite all of Pro's efforts to make himself a fool, he's not. A fool wouldn't care for a debate. PRO did.
Posted by That.Guy 5 years ago
That.Guy
Oh wait, just understood the debate. Heh, ignore previous comment
Posted by That.Guy 5 years ago
That.Guy
Illegalcombatant has said there is no God, ergo is a fool

I don't see how this makes sense
Posted by FREEDO 5 years ago
FREEDO
And now everyone who visits the comments will lose the game.
Posted by Spartan 5 years ago
Spartan
this debate somehow made me lose the game.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
IllegalcombatantFREEDOTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: What they said... IC outlined his argument, thought through ways to make himself look like a fool, and responded in an articulate way. This proves that he is not a fool. 1:4 Con
Vote Placed by medic0506 5 years ago
medic0506
IllegalcombatantFREEDOTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: I almost gave the win to pro thinking that only a fool would make himself look like an ass just to win a debate, but then I realized that would require calculated intent, as con stated. Someone without sense or judgement would not be able to calculate intent. Although he proved himself silly, con showed that he's no fool. 3:2 for con.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
IllegalcombatantFREEDOTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Nice effort from IC, but Freedo kept hammering home the point that Pro was trying to argue for a win. 3:2 for the discordian half-n-half.