The Instigator
olle15
Pro (for)
Losing
18 Points
The Contender
Geekis_Khan
Con (against)
Winning
27 Points

Samurai Jack ultimately fales in his mission to stop Aku

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: 4/14/2008 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,905 times Debate No: 3619
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (15)

 

olle15

Pro

It's simple do to theoretical time mechanics and basic logic it can be deduced that even if he dose make it back to his time period he failed in his atempt to kill Aku all because of how the future is already. But I will give my opponent the opportunity to prove me wrong before I start on my argument I really only need two rounds.

P.S. Please only except this debate if you know the series don't just go and research at the last minute you won't get the gist of the show from reading it.

Your turn
Geekis_Khan

Con

First, I'll thank my opponent for starting the debate, as is customary.

Second, though I'm not actually a fan of the series, I do know it and know what it's about, so I can understand this debate.

Third, for the purpose of the debate, I will be looking at time as linear. If my opponent wishes to argue this framework, I'll listen to what he proposes as an alternate view of time (which, logically, would either be cyclical or every event according at once, and time just being a collection of various moments). Depending his argument as to why to accept a different view of time, I will accept or decline it. However, I urge him to accept the framework as time as linear, as the is the simplest and most obvious explanation, and the other two explanations lack empirical evidence.

Now, on to my case.

The plot revolves around Jack going back in time to stop Aku from attaining power in the current future that Jack has been sent into. If I'm understanding my opponent's argument, it's basically since that Aku is still in power, Jack has failed and will always fail.

Now, consider this: The events that Jack missed while travelling through time have already happened without him attempting to stop Aku. Since Jack was removed from these events initially, Aku will always be in power until Jack has travelled to an event in the past where his presence would make a difference. So, in order for my opponent to win the debate, he has to prove that Jack has already travelled back in time to every event where his presence would have made a difference and failed.

Basically, until Jack travels back in time to an event where his presence makes a difference, Aku will always be in power. Since he was removed from those events initially, he did not have a chance to stop Aku in all of them. By travelling back in time, he is altering the as-of-yet unaltered past. As long as some of this past remains unaltered, Jack has not failed in his mission.
Debate Round No. 1
olle15

Pro

First off let me thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

Second, though I like my opponent's way of thinking I cannot accept his way of thinking for two reasons:

One, if I accept my opponent's theory as is it would mean instant loss for me and this is forgetting the fact that it's incomplete because in reality it would be in a complete loop.

Two, my opponent's thinking is flawed and the loop is broken if we were to complete the loop he's started it would still lead to the inevitable ending where Jack fails. Why? Because the only way for Jack to succeed in his mission of stopping Aku is to go back in time and stop him from taking over the world. This all would have occurred in the past and would be apparent in the future unless he was killed. So if it isn't apparent in the future then that means it never happened and if it never happened he either died or never went back to his time which is even worse than going back and losing like a man. And I would win.

But that is not the case because I have substantial evidence that gives me reason to believe he did go back but failed. (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

Find the section that says plot read the last paragraph excluding the part where it says he was predestined to succeed that is pure speculation by the writer and therefore cannot be used as evidence.

This shows that most likely he did go back to his time period and failed as the future clearly shows and as they say time waits for no one not even Jack.
Geekis_Khan

Con

1.) My opponent did not give any reasoning as to how my logic presented a loop. He simply said that it presented a loop. Therefore, I extend all of my arguments.

2.) Jack is trying to get back in time to an event that he was initially removed from. Until he reaches that event, he cannot be counted as failing, because it hasn't yet happened. His time-travel back to the point where he wants to be at hasn't yet happened. Therefore, he has not had his chance to get rid of Aku yet, so of course he is still in power.

3.) Let's say that it presents a "time loop". I still maintain that you offered no reasoning for such a loop, but for the sake of argument, I will continue. Since this loop would create a paradox of events, the universe would be unable to function, and it would destroy itself. Even though this isn't what Jack wants it would stop Aku, because he would be destroyed along with the universe. Which means that Jack is successful.
Debate Round No. 2
olle15

Pro

My opponent has noted that in his opinion I did not give reason to how his logic presented a loop but that is not the case I clearly stated that though young Jack missed out on the events older Jack would have if he was successful in finding a portal home. And if he did get home and beat Aku if would be visible to younger Jack because it would have already happened in the past even though he technically hadn't done it yet, but it wasn't. This is why I said his logic presented a loop that would have been visible but it isn't meaning no loop thus flawed logic.

Though it has not happened to him yet doesn't mean it hasn't already happened to his older self have you ever herd of the past effecting the future?

This is not a paradox it can be solved if he went to the past and won no world takeover if he lost that stops the loop. Also even if the universe did take Aku out in a paradox caused implosion Jack still didn't succeed in his mission because he didn't defeat Aku himself in fact it would be a draw.

To my argument:

You never acknowledged my argument that he went back in time or the corresponding proof.

Finally since you had to bring the universe into it I have to add this Aku threw him into the future but the future is undetermined bringing up the topic of multiple universes so if the future is undetermined any future he was thrown into would only be a possible future from another universe. So based on what we've seen this would be one possible future where he most likely failed. But in the off chance he didn't fail (which is not true) in the infinite other dimensions he did fail at least once sense every universe has to have a different outcome. This means that he will have won somewhere but my debate is not about if he won but about the fact that ultimately he failed and somewhere he did.

Now I plead to the readers of this debate and urge them to vote not for the simplest argument but the smartest and most logical argument. Vote for the argument that thoroughly explains his theory. Think deeply about which argument is more sound even if it is complex.

Your turn and good luck in the polls.
Geekis_Khan

Con

"You never acknowledged my argument that he went back in time or the corresponding proof."

There's no actual "proof" in this debate. It's all theoretical.

The topic of multiple universes is unrelated. There doesn't need to be different universes.

And if the universe implodes, it doesn't make it a draw. The topic is whether or not Jack fails in his mission to stop Aku. Since the universe imploding would stop Aku, you would vote CON in the event of implosion.

"Now I plead to the readers of this debate and urge them to vote not for the simplest argument but the smartest and most logical argument. Vote for the argument that thoroughly explains his theory. Think deeply about which argument is more sound even if it is complex."

I agree. But if mine is simple and right, I should still win.

I'm going to provide a final analogy to help clarify my argument.

Time is nothing but a dimension. So, we'll use another dimension for the analogy: distance.

We have three locations: Location A, Location B, and Location C.

I am at Location A.

Now, if we I am traveling by normal means, this means that I must walk through Location B in order to get to Location C.

However, I am at Location A and I am teleported to Location C. I have never visited Location B.

However, there is something at Location B that I can do that will altar Location C. Having not visited Location B YET, Location C remains unaltered. Location C will remain unaltered until I go back to Location B. Just because I haven't gone back YET and altered it YET doesn't mean that I ultimately fail to do so.

Now, apply this to time. We have three times: Time A, Time B, and Time C. Traditionally, you must go through Time B in order to reach Time C. However, I am in Time A and am teleported to Time C. I have never visited Time B. However, if there is something in Time B that if I do, it altars Time C. But since I have not gone back to Time B YET, Time C remains unaltered.

This show simply takes place while Samurai Jack has reached Time C before he travels back in Time to Time B to altar something. It remains logical that in order for him to have incentive to go back in time in the first place, there must be a period before he goes back in time. This is all the show is showing.

You have to reemmber that simply another dimension. It works no different than distance. Please vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Geekis_Khan 9 years ago
Geekis_Khan
I meant "occurring at once" not "according at once".
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by LedLegend 9 years ago
LedLegend
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by geekiskhanisgod 9 years ago
geekiskhanisgod
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by numa 9 years ago
numa
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Ramper0987 9 years ago
Ramper0987
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by ss0987 9 years ago
ss0987
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by dave23456 9 years ago
dave23456
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Rilo 9 years ago
Rilo
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Random_Man 9 years ago
Random_Man
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Danielle 9 years ago
Danielle
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by WeaponE 9 years ago
WeaponE
olle15Geekis_KhanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30