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

Should Tarot Cards Be Considered Good, Part Two!

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/15/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 651 times Debate No: 49182
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Round two of the "Should Tarot Cards Be Considered Good?" debate! I will post a link to the original here, , so that those who do not know what this is about can follow us. And now, for the opening argument:

In the previous debate, I stated that:
1. People should not base their decision of whether or not to DUI on tarot readings, they should just not DUI.
2.If a tarot reading seemed to have predicted a near-death scenario for a family member, this does not mean that the two are related.
3. The burden of proof lies on the person making the claim, hence I don't have to prove that tarot cards shouldn't be considered good, just refute your claims that it should.

I wish the best of luck to Cooldudebro.


Good luck!

Rebuttal 1: I am not saying it is okay, I am saying people are less likely to do it if tarot cards tell them something is gonna happen.

Rebuttal 2: The cards don't know, it is the spirit who helps you.
Debate Round No. 1


1. I am no expert on tarots, but it is just as likely that, right before going off to the pub, the parents got their tarots read and the cards said that this is a fine night and everything will be okay. Next thing you know, they're either getting arrested for DUI or not getting caught and instead killing four people on a drunken drive down the expressway. So?

2. Spirit? What spirit? You mean the spirits that you've been drinking? <- This was a joke. But seriously, there is no real evidence for spirits, except for (un-trustworthy and/or drunk) people telling you that they've seen spirits. And those people have likely been drinking too many spirits.


Rebuttal 1:

It is just a scenario.

Rebuttal 2:

Here is some proof.
Debate Round No. 2


When I read the article, I was at first surprised that what seemed to be a respectable science news site was posting this. I read further, until I finally realised...

The article didn't even support your claim! No, really, if you had actually read the article you would realise that it actually does not say that Einstein's laws prove ghosts, but actually debunks that claim. Forgive me for being rude, but don't throw bollocks at me. Check. Your. Sources.

I'm still waiting for actual proof of spirits.


Rebuttal 1: I thought you would be smarter than that. I Had to post the short version. I thought you were going to see the flaws in this. They only adress one form of ghost communication. EVP's and orbs are unexplainable.

Many say orbs are just dust, but, some orbs change directions multiple times. Something that dust can't do.

Even if there is nothing by it, it is still a lot of fun.
Debate Round No. 3


EVP's and orbs are not proof, they have never been tested in strict scientific study and are vague at best. This audio signal sounds human-like, it MUST be dead people! A weird orb type thing? It MUST be spooky spirits! It's confirmation bias, and it proves nil.


What else do I have to do? Pull a rabbit out of my @ss?

My family and I are about to go to vacation. I will resume when I get tomorrow when we take of for our destination.
Debate Round No. 4


Being that you have not provided sufficient proof for the existence of the spirits you claim to influence tarot cards; being that whatever "evidence" you have shown for the usefulness of tarot cards is incredibly confirmationally biased; knowing that this means you have not carried your burden of proof as we have established earlier; I respectfully ask the voters upon this debate to vote for the "Con" position.

I wish you, Cooldudebro, good luck, and may the best debater win.


Here is yet another link that confirms ghosts when you call it so called "bias" try calling out websites like creation101 and darwintheape. However, I believe with my links, you just don't want to accept it. I have shown proof that there is an afterlife.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I have proved an afterlife. The experience with the tarot can't be viewed as coincidence because the chance are virtually none. I think I have presented more than enough proof while all con did was say the links were bias, and everything was just a coincidence. In the end, I think even atheist have to vote pro.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by SoloNo.1 2 years ago
I didn't even notice that bit, kbub! Pfft, some sources.
Posted by kbub 2 years ago
I love how Pro's link says that Einstein came up with the first law of thermodynamics XP
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by kbub 2 years ago
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro overloads the last round with new arguments, though s/he had plenty of time and space to add them before (conduct). Pro, who has BoP it seems, does not provide evidence of spirits and doesn't show unique advantages of tarot cards aside from spirits (arguments).