The Instigator
InsaneSanity
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Prove your existence!

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/21/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 681 times Debate No: 81278
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

InsaneSanity

Con

I saw someone else set up a debate like this one, unfortunately con didn't give arguments more than a sentence long. I decided that I wanted to try it. Basically I want to prove that I cannot know if you exist or not, and you want to prove that you do exist. Thanks to whoever accepts this!
vi_spex

Pro

you didnt write these words
Debate Round No. 1
InsaneSanity

Con

Whatever words I may see on this screen, there is no proof that you are not simply a computer program, that types in automated responses, or that you, the iPad I am writing this on, or even my whole life is not just an dream or experience machine*. Descartes' quote "Cognito ergo sum", or "I think, therefore I am", applies to each individual person only. I cannot use it to prove the existence of anyone else to myself by changing it to "you think, therefore you are", because I cannot read anyone's thoughts, I have no proof that they even have thoughts aside from a feeling or an assumption that because I have thoughts and exist, everyone else who I see, hear, or otherwise sense must have thoughts too. It is illogical.
Further increasing the odds that you do not exist is the coincidence that started this debate. Within five minutes of me posting the challenge, you accepted it, and you were one of only two sides in the debate that made me want to start this one, with you and LaughItUpLydia**. On a website with at least hundreds and probably thousands of people, it just happened to be you, and that quickly. That is the sort of coincidence that often happens in works of fiction, which my brain knows about, and is quite likely to pull into the dream if life is a dream. I realize that I did comment on that debate, and that you may have searched for a similar debate to the one you were in before (all if you really exist of course), but the odds against that are still truly tremendous.

*http://www.uky.edu...
**http://www.debate.org...
vi_spex

Pro

then that means i am a computer program, and i have proved that i am not you

to me its not so much about, do i know what another really thinks or something, because i simply can not be certain of that by default.. the known about another person is the light emitted through the understanding of his/hers being

without belief you cease to exist, as i can only know myself
Debate Round No. 2
InsaneSanity

Con

I wasn't trying to say you were me, that would imply that you do exist, and simply part of me. Although the concept of all people being one and the same is an interesting one, I will not go into it now.
You make an interesting point about the light emitted through the understanding of one's being. A computer or dream cannot make some things completely believable, such as a person or music. But we have no proof that anything that we see in this, for lack of a better word, "existence", is how things really work in the real, physical world if this is not it. Physicality may not even exist, but that is beside the point, I mean the world that is created without humans or whatever the sentient race is. This must exist, because even if there is only one truly existing person then we are either in that reality or that reality exists, because there cannot be existence without reality by definition. And since this debate exists at least in a manner in which it can be experienced, either you, someone who is reading it, or I must exist. I say that it exists because if none of us existed, then that could not exist, and if someone here does exist, then it has been proved that this debate exists.
Now that the existence of some sort of advanced life has been proven, I can get back to my original point. The hypothetical machines that create our lives may have been programmed to make the machines in the illusion unable to perfectly simulate a person or music to take away suspicion that life is just a machine. If all computers that one experienced were unable to replicate any emotion or person, then it would reduce suspicion that all of life was a computer, to put it differently.
That may seem to affirm that either your light of the understanding of a person argument was true or that you are a computer program, but if all of life was a computer program then you would be such a minuscule part of it, just a few words on a screen for me or one of seven billion people, billions of animals, trillions of insects, and millions of light-years of space, that it would hardly be fair to say that you exist.
This life could also be a dream, in which the brain knows the light of understanding of people who the person has met in real life, so it can replicate it perfectly.
As for your last argument, as you can only know yourself, I can only know myself. That has only proven your existence to yourself, if you exist, no one else can know you exist just because you can know your own existence, they cannot read your mind.
Belief has nothing to do with reality, I could believe that I am John A. Macdonald, that does not mean that I am him or that I was the first prime minister of Canada. Similarly, I could believe that there is no such thing as air, and air would continue to exist. If belief does create reality, then how could the Greek gods not be real, and instead science and/or modern religions are true (I personally believe both, but that's not the topic of this debate)? Nobody looked into the sky and believed that we were a small dot in a massive world with over a hundred different elements making it up and millions of giant flaming balls of gas and plasma were in the sky, people looked into the sky, and after seeing that there were flaming balls, believing that we were on a planet like we are. Most of the time the seeing comes before anyone believes that something is true.
If existence did stream from the belief of one or more people, which I have proven according to history which may not have truly happened is not true, then indeed all of us would exist, but you have yet to make a valid point that that would be true, or that in any other way existence ceases without belief.

Thanks for accepting this debate! I should have made it have more rounds, sorry about that. If you want we could do this again with more rounds, I would be on either side, proving or disproving provability. I think that this is an interesting topic for debate that could be done multiple times with more depth explored each time.
vi_spex

Pro

life is not a machine, machine is death

i am light on your screen and a story in your mind

life is true for experience to exist.. everything that exist has an opposite for it to exist

why do we have different words if they all mean black? a stone is a stone, how do you know what i am talking about if the word stone simply means black?
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Deb-8-A-Bull 1 year ago
Deb-8-A-Bull
It takes 2 people to make a baby . Usually. The male inserts his. You know the rest. The pyramids where built like ages ago .
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
so you wrote those words?
Posted by InsaneSanity 1 year ago
InsaneSanity
True, but if he is part of my brain in a dream (or your brain if you are the only existing being) then he does not exist, he is only a figment of my imagination. My computer program was quite a weak argument, I'll admit.
Posted by m8 1 year ago
m8
To be clear, you didn't say he had to exist as a human. Whether he exists as a computer program or a person, he still exists.
Posted by InsaneSanity 1 year ago
InsaneSanity
I'm not sure if you were trying to make a point in the debate with "you didn't write those words" or not, if you did please tell me in your next response. Thanks! :) If not, and if I exist, I did write those words.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
if=false

i only have to block when some one attacks
Posted by InsaneSanity 1 year ago
InsaneSanity
But if this life was all a dream, then would all of the rocks in that dream still exist? You have to define reality to prove the existence or nonexistence of something, and if this existence was all a dream of mine, would everything truly exist? One could argue no because it has both has no physical existence like a rock or consciousness like a human, but some might think that it does exist, because it is made up of electric signals in the brain.
Also vi_spex please give more than a sentence per round this time, that would make this a lot more interesting.
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
Zundon101 is an imbecile if he thinks that a stone does not exist because it does not think. Simply because Rene Descartes once said, "I think therfore I exist" does NOT MEAN that he ever implied, suggested or indicated that something must think to exist. He simply proved his existence because he ACTUALLY thinks. fawk.. this is the internet 2015. imbeciles.
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
asking if I am real is a DANGEROUS and stupid question to bag.
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
I exist according to the definition of existence simply because u are reading this. the nature of my existence is irrelevant.
also. ur inability to think of something that I do not present until I present it proves my existence.

"What did the elephant say, when -?" the next part of that sentence is what makes this sentence an actually valid example. as of yet, your mind could have perceived the content, and spontaneously arranged this formula for you to - in the state of your obsessive delirium - potentially comprise, but what if I say something comical? Then it is not u.

"How many drops can a poop drop drop before a poop drop drops drops drops drops drops ?
No votes have been placed for this debate.