The Instigator
joeecc412
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
anarcholibertyman
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

RESOLVED: when in conflict idealism ought to be valued over pragmatism

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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: 3/30/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 941 times Debate No: 15686
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

joeecc412

Con

The debate will start with my opponent. but first I would like to define the terms.
Idealism:the tendency to represent things in an ideal form, or as they might or should be rather than as they are.
Pragmatism:a philosophical movement or system having various forms, but generally stressing practical consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value.
anarcholibertyman

Pro

I'll allow my opponent to begin as he is instigator.
Debate Round No. 1
joeecc412

Con

joeecc412 forfeited this round.
anarcholibertyman

Pro

I wil wait until next round for my opponent to begin.
Debate Round No. 2
joeecc412

Con

joeecc412 forfeited this round.
anarcholibertyman

Pro

anarcholibertyman forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
joeecc412

Con

joeecc412 forfeited this round.
anarcholibertyman

Pro

anarcholibertyman forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by joeecc412 5 years ago
joeecc412
would be interested in trying this again
Posted by joeecc412 5 years ago
joeecc412
@ gerrandesquire I would be interested in debating you in another similar topic. @anarcholibertyman I am sorry about this debate, I had surgery which is why I missed so many rounds.
Posted by Bob_Gneu 5 years ago
Bob_Gneu
@Floid
I completely agree with you, and changed my debate as such, but was quickly told that i was in the wrong because of it. Apparently it is an unspoken rule that the statements need to be in the positive and taking the con is an admirable position. Odd.
Posted by gerrandesquire 5 years ago
gerrandesquire
Please increase the character limit to max (8000) and reduce the voting period to a week. I want to accept this debate.
Posted by Floid 5 years ago
Floid
Can someone explain to me the purpose of starting a debate as Con when they resolution could easily be flipped so that the person starting the debate was Pro (makes more sense to me).

So why not have Resolved: when in conflict, pragmatism ought to be valued over idealism and have the instigator be pro. It seems like 90% of the debates I look at the person starting the debate goes con...
Posted by AznWords 5 years ago
AznWords
I agree that if idealism was redefined it would make for a better debate and also make the debate more appealing to the contender. The definition you give for idealism sounds like you're calling idealism human tendency towards delusion rather than the idea that consciousness/observation plays a role in crafting reality.
Posted by joeecc412 5 years ago
joeecc412
If any one wants to change the definitions before the debate just let me know. I am open to any opinions on what they should be.
Posted by CGBSpender 5 years ago
CGBSpender
What's the source of your definition for idealism? The philosophical definition of idealism has more to do with the nature of reality being not physical, but a more thought based thing. For example, Bishop Berkeley believed "to be is to be perceived". That is perhaps the most radical form of idealism.
Posted by wolfhaines 5 years ago
wolfhaines
Sounds like a good debate. Will keep an eye on it.
No votes have been placed for this debate.