The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Sherlock Holmes theory

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/23/2016 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 484 times Debate No: 93014
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




I quote "What the deuce is the solar system to me? You say we go around the Sun. If we went around the moon it wouldn't make a pennyworth of difference to me or my work."
While it may make a difference, Holmes wants to say that the knowledge about it wouldn't make a difference. I am willing to defend that proposition,
Debate Round No. 1


Knowledge of the solar system doesn't help the common or rare detective, it should be obvious.
Not every man is an astronaut or space scientist, only they need to know about solar system.
What will a detective care whether it is summer or winter, whether there is solar radiation or not. So long as it doesn't significantly affect him or his work, he doesn't need to know about it. And it is extremely unlikely he will be handling a case of space scientists wherein this info will help him.


My opponent is arguing that Sherlock doesn't need to know if the sun goes around the moon, or vice versa. But then my opponent says "And it is extremely unlikely he will be handling a case of space scientists wherein this info will help him." When Pro says unlikely, it means that there are situations in which Sherlock would need to know, therefore my my point that it does make a difference if Sherlock knows or not, is achieved.
Debate Round No. 2


But realistically it won't make a difference, and Holmes could always study the solar system in the duration of that case and forget it once again. Furthermore, a murder of a space scientist won't require this knowledge, the case of a space scientist with some alterations in the solar system would require the knowledge. I fear this may become a plot for a superhero comic. Anyways, good debate.


Pro says that realistically not, but again it's a Sherlock Holmes book/movie/show, in which there are crazy cases for Sherlock to solve, in fact, Sherlock himself is unrealistic. Then my opponent says that he could learn it, then forget it again, but the things is that still proves my case since he had to know it for a case. We are arguing "Holmes wants to say that the knowledge about it wouldn't make a difference", but even if he forgets it, it still made a difference. And it also doesn't have to be as ridiculous as going out to space, maybe someone is pointing a gun at his head and he says if Sherlock doesn't answer this question right he dies. And the question of course would be does the earth go around the sun or the moon. Therefore I have proved it could affect him, therefore it does matter that he knows it.

Thanks to my opponent and voters for this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
>Reported vote: JustVotingTiedDebates// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con had more powerful arguments as he rebutted every point his opponent had. CON also shows the contradictions PRO had and refutes them all.

[*Reason for removal*] Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter has to examine the specifics of the debate, and in this case the voter merely assesses it generally, stating that one side was rebutted fully and had contradictions. The voter is required to assess specific points made by both sides to determine the outcome.
No votes have been placed for this debate.