The Instigator
Hezekiah_Ahaz
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
yuiru
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Sophistry

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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...
yuiru
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,172 times Debate No: 23985
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (4)

 

Hezekiah_Ahaz

Pro

Open to any.

All rounds cross examination.

I noticed that people here are pseudo-philosophers. When examined they all fold like little chairs. They evade questions like plagues and so on.
yuiru

Con

Okay since it says "Sophistry" I will be deliberately argeeing against sophistry...

My first argument is, sophistry decieves people, therefore I don't like it.

Argument 1:
Sophistry can lead to cancer, this is because someone using sophistry will say something that leads cancer actually doesn't, then someone will believe them and they will contract cancer.

Argument 2:
Sophistry is wrong, because it is fallacious.

Argeement 1:

You are right, people are psedudo-philosphers, this is because of sophistry. Sophistry is to blame for avoiding questions similar to the plague. This is bad because, it is like the actual plague!!!!

Chicken:

Malicious advertisment uses sophistry, this advertisment is bad, therefore sophistry is bad too!!!!

I rest my case!!!!
Debate Round No. 1
Hezekiah_Ahaz

Pro

Con is arguing with me not against.

We should all ask what is he doing.

Auto loss for trolling
yuiru

Con

"Con is arguing with me not against.

We should all ask what is he doing.

Auto loss for trolling"


Well since pro (the proponent of sophistry) claims to be agreeing on my side, he has accepted defeat.

Why is pro trying to pretend I'm wrong for him argeeing with me? I am here to contend against sophistry, I am doing that.

Rather, we should ask what he, the pro, is doing!
Debate Round No. 2
Hezekiah_Ahaz

Pro

Auto loss for con.

Trolling
yuiru

Con

How unfortunate, Pro refuses to defend his position.

Pro concedes my posistion, therefore he refuses to defend his posistion

Quoting Pros argument, "Con is arguing with me not against. We should all ask what is he doing. Auto loss for trolling"
- Said by, Hezekiah_Ahaz 神

As you can see above, this appears to be some sort of sophistry on the behalf of Pro, who is by no coincidence arguing for sophistry. Well, the best way to argue for something is to use it, eh?

Pro results to an ad hominem circumstantial argument which can be classified as an Apeal to Motive argument, this is an obvious Red Herring fallacy. Pro is arguing irrelevent things. Even if I am "trolling" how does that falsify my argument at all?

*also, of course I'm not arguing against YOU, I'm arguing with you because I'm arguing against YOUR posistion!!! Not you!*

Pro also refuses to saying other than claiming I should lose.


Vote CON

Why? because I said so and Pro holds the burden of proof and hasn't even argued or rebut my arguments, leaving me with no other option but to talk to myself!

SAVE ME FROM HIM!! VOTE CON!






Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by philosotroll 5 years ago
philosotroll
And it appears Mr. A-ha's has actually left DDO after getting his clock cleaned yet again.
Posted by YYW 5 years ago
YYW
By heaven! What grand intellectual prowess hath befallen upon we, the humble thinkers of the Debate Dot Org! Hezekiah_Ahaz, ye wise and prominent! We extend to the our sincerest gratitude for illuminating the egregious error of our ways! Let us all sing and be merry, for we are now free from that enduring storm of academic turpitude!
Posted by TheOrator 5 years ago
TheOrator
That's what he does in just about every debate. That's why he has won any yet
Posted by philosotroll 5 years ago
philosotroll
Is Hez planning to pad his record by arguing that he ought to automatically win every debate, instead of arguing the issue? Because that'd be hilarious.
Posted by TheOrator 5 years ago
TheOrator
Yet another argument where Hez doesn't actually argue, that happens all too often :/
Posted by Meatros 5 years ago
Meatros
Hez, your resolution i completely unclear and yet you criticize Con for trying to put forth an argument?
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 5 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
What the devil is Pro doing?
Posted by yuiru 5 years ago
yuiru
Take that "The_Fool_on_the_hill" ha!, and your name is very fitting you big ol' blue @$$ navi.
Posted by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
wut
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 5 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
About it. It seems like troll debate so far.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by tyler90az 5 years ago
tyler90az
Hezekiah_AhazyuiruTied
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: Obvious is obvious!
Vote Placed by TheOrator 5 years ago
TheOrator
Hezekiah_AhazyuiruTied
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: I would have given the conduct point to the Pro for a breaking of rules, but no rules were actually broken. Pro did not set forth any structure besides Cross-Ex, and so there is no evidence of trolling whatsoever. As Con also provided the only argument, she got the arguments vote.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 5 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Hezekiah_AhazyuiruTied
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: Auto-loss for Pro, trolling. He put himself Pro for the resolution "Sophistry". The most logical interpretation of this is not that he is against sophistry. He has furthermore convinced me against sophistry by his own usage of it.
Vote Placed by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
Hezekiah_AhazyuiruTied
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: I'd have been inclined to vote for PRO, if it weren't for the fact he came across horribly in his own argument, seemingly insulting the audience, the site's users and his opponent.