The Instigator
Zarathrusa
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
logicalrobot
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points

Resolved: I Exist

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 4 votes the winner is...
logicalrobot
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/11/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,386 times Debate No: 25053
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (4)

 

Zarathrusa

Pro

I will present arguments in R2 for why I exist.
logicalrobot

Con

I accept your debate. As pro, you will have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you exist while I only have to cast reasonable doubt on your assertion.
Debate Round No. 1
Zarathrusa

Pro

Zarathrusa forfeited this round.
logicalrobot

Con

That's a shame. Well I guess that means I win. I was looking forward to an interesting debate....
Debate Round No. 2
Zarathrusa

Pro

Zarathrusa forfeited this round.
logicalrobot

Con

Since my opponent has forfeited, I guess I win
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by YYW 5 years ago
YYW
Must... resist... temptation... to... accept....

*assumes soap box*

Nihilism now! Nihilism tomorrow! Nihilism forever!!!

*steps off from soapbox*
Posted by tarkovsky 5 years ago
tarkovsky
Metaphysical solipsism is more of a belief founded on an epistemic principle. The principle isn't really capable of proving something, it only warrants the belief.
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
FREEDO, you ARE a unique argument.
Posted by FREEDO 5 years ago
FREEDO
Tempted. Haven't debated in awhile. I have a unique argument.
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
Metaphysical, not epistemic.
Posted by Neuhaus1994 5 years ago
Neuhaus1994
I would like to accept, but by using the word I that would imply that I would have to prove that you do not exist. For that reason you would be debating you own existance which is self assured, while I would be debating that the person I am debating does not exist. Both are very provable points. I will accept if you clearify your debate.
Posted by tarkovsky 5 years ago
tarkovsky
The argument from solipsism doesn't refute the resolution. Solipsism makes the epistemic claim that if we know, the only the thing we can know is that my mind exists. This doesn't prove that your mind or his mind or her mind doesn't exist, only that I can't be sure of it. Zarathustra can only win a debate so long as the negation of the resolution is untenable.
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
inb4 solipsism.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 5 years ago
InVinoVeritas
BoP is on the person proving nonexistence? .......................
Posted by tarkovsky 5 years ago
tarkovsky
Prove you don't exist? Prove a negative?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
ZarathrusalogicalrobotTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 5 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
ZarathrusalogicalrobotTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: AA BB CC DD EE FF GG HH II JJ KK LL MM NN OO PP QQ RR SS TT UU VV WW XX YY ZZ
Vote Placed by famer 5 years ago
famer
ZarathrusalogicalrobotTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: lol
Vote Placed by tarkovsky 5 years ago
tarkovsky
ZarathrusalogicalrobotTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: FF