The Instigator
robertg0916
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
m93samman
Con (against)
Winning
29 Points

Reality is what we perceive it to be.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/7/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,923 times Debate No: 14701
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (6)

 

robertg0916

Pro

My first debate topic that i want to discuss includes is that reality is what we perceive it to be.
m93samman

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate. I'll define terms in this round, and debate can begin in round 2.

All that I feel is necessary to be defined is "reality" and "perceive"

From http://dictionary.reference.com...

reality

— n
1.the state of things as they are or appear to be, rather than as one might wish them to be
2.something that is real
3.the state of being real
4.philosophy
a. that which exists, independent of human awareness
b. See also conceptualism Compare appearance the totality of facts as they are independent of human awareness of them
5.in reality actually; in fact

perceive

— vb
1.to become aware of (something) through the senses, esp the sight; recognize or observe
2.to come to comprehend; grasp

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition


I wish my opponent luck, and look forward to a good debate.
Debate Round No. 1
robertg0916

Pro

we perceive reality in time in what we call a dimension . to completely understand the "reality of reality" , we would need to exclude ourselves from the physical. I find this topic very complex but yet so curious. don't you agree?
m93samman

Con

My opponent's argument is very vague.

I'll present my own arguments and hope that he'll clarify in the future rounds.

Contention 1: Perception implies a comprehension of reality which is unique to the individual.

Two widely recognized perceptive phenomena, the Necker cube [1] and the Rubin Vase [2], demonstrate how immense the discrepancies can be from one perception to another in terms of the singular reality of a two dimensional drawing.

Contention 2: Perception consitutes premature predictions of reality, which are often wrong.

A story of the Prophet Moses from the Qura'an explains my argument.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

[18:64] (Moses) said, "That was the place we were looking for." They traced their steps back.

[18:65] They found one of our servants, whom we blessed with mercy, and bestowed upon him from our own knowledge.

[18:66] Moses said to him, "Can I follow you, that you may teach me some of the knowledge and the guidance bestowed upon you?"

[18:67] He said, "You cannot stand to be with me.

[18:68] "How can you stand that which you do not comprehend?"

[18:69] He said, "You will find me, GOD willing, patient. I will not disobey any command you give me."

[18:70] He said, "If you follow me, then you shall not ask me about anything, unless I choose to tell you about it."

[18:71] So they went. When they boarded a ship, he bore a hole in it. He said, "Did you bore a hole in it to drown its people? You have committed something terrible."

[18:72] He said, "Did I not say that you cannot stand to be with me?"

[18:73] He said, "I am sorry. Do not punish me for my forgetfulness; do not be too harsh with me."

[18:74] So they went. When they met a young boy, he killed him. He said, "Why did you kill such an innocent person, who did not kill another person? You have committed something horrendous."

[18:75] He said, "Did I not tell you that you cannot stand to be with me?"

[18:76] He said, "If I ask you about anything else, then do not keep me with you. You have seen enough apologies from me."

[18:77] So they went. When they reached a certain community, they asked the people for food, but they refused to host them. Soon, they found a wall about to collapse, and he fixed it. He said, "You could have demanded a wage for that!"

There is a Good Reason for Everything

[18:78] He said, "Now we have to part company. But I will explain to you everything you could not stand.

[18:79] "As for the ship, it belonged to poor fishermen, and I wanted to render it defective. There was a king coming after them, who was confiscating every ship, forcibly.

[18:80] "As for the boy, his parents were good believers, and we saw that he was going to burden them with his transgression and disbelief.

[18:81] "We willed that your Lord substitute in his place another son; one who is better in righteousness and kindness.

[18:82] "As for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city. Under it, there was a treasure that belonged to them. Because their father was a righteous man, your Lord wanted them to grow up and attain full strength, then extract their treasure. Such is mercy from your Lord. I did none of that of my own volition. This is the explanation of the things you could not stand."

~~~~~~~~~~~~ [3]

Clearly, what the prophet had perceived was far different from reality. I'll leave it at that, and wait for my opponent's response.

=== Sources ===

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[3] http://www.submission.org...
Debate Round No. 2
robertg0916

Pro

Reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or may be thought to be. In its widest definition, reality includes everything that is and has being, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. obviously the individual indeed concluded his ideology of what was suppose to be perceive to be true. however the man was in the presents of time, time is what separates us from of god.

1. We each have 5 physical senses , which are used in our dimension of time "the physical"
2. The supernatural is excluded of our dimension and can be filtered in the link of time "the physical"
3.To understand the reality, we would need to "die" exit our physical body, and confront the supernatural dimension.
My "whole" point is that the reality in "the physical" is what we perceive but the reality of reality is behind the supernatural.

if you still are uncertain of my statement .watch this video. it has great information.
m93samman

Con

I thank my opponent for his repsonse, although it was lacking in serious content.

1) Extend all of my arguments. My case was unaddressed.

2) My opponent continues to make assertions, rather than arguments. They are unwarranted and he garners no offense from them.

3) The video is interesting, although it has a few flaws. First, the video clearly makes a *distinction* between perception and reality. Second, the authenticity and reliability of the video is limited; how much can we trust YouTube for our knowledge?

I urge a Con vote.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by ErikMontague 6 years ago
ErikMontague
That could have been a fantastic debate. Pro just made it a joke...
Posted by thedude346 6 years ago
thedude346
i love a good debate, but i just can't argue with that
You got it right on the spot, my friend lol
Posted by 4stFire 6 years ago
4stFire
If you change the voting period to a fixed amount of time, I'll accept...
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
robertg0916m93sammanTied
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: S/G to Con for multiple spelling and punctuation issues on Pro's part. The argument vote also goes to Con seeing as Pro didn't provide support for his various assertions and didn't attempt any refutations of Con's points.
Vote Placed by thedude346 6 years ago
thedude346
robertg0916m93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 
Vote Placed by Mirza 6 years ago
Mirza
robertg0916m93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con argued logically and he negated the resolution. Pro did not address the arguments Con presented. Sources go to Con because Pro hardly used them. S
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
robertg0916m93sammanTied
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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro simply asserted and ignored Cons argument.
Vote Placed by Grape 6 years ago
Grape
robertg0916m93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's argument is incoherent and lacks meaningful sources. Con uses sources well and clearly shows the distinction between perception and reality.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
robertg0916m93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro drops all con arguments and doesnt capitalize.