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

The illuminati is real

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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: Select Winner
Started: 2/11/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 720 times Debate No: 69845
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




1st round is acceptance round 2 and 3 lay out position and round 4 is response to opponents points.
You may ONLY use proven fact and no conspiracy theories! Good luck whoever chooses to accept.


I thank my opponent for this Debate.

Now, Although this is the acceptance round, I would like to "clear the air" so to speak. I am a debater. I belong to a home school debate league. And if there is one thing I learned, it is this: Never debate anything until you have the definitions laid out.
With that in mind, and seeing that my opponent did not provide any definitions, I will provide my own.

Illuminati - "People claiming to possess special enlightenment or knowledge of something."
Real - "Actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed."

Both definitions were retrieved from

I hope that this ensures that my oponent and I are both debating on the same page. I look forward to an enlightening and intellectual debate.
Debate Round No. 1



Now I will say I am not a part of a debate team or any debate organization so this will be a very loosely structured debate. I thank my respectable opponent for his definitions of the terms, and I am thrilled to be debating someone of his skill. Also for all purposes of this debate enlightenment in the context of the definition of illuminati is a state of being enlightened. Enlightened is defined by Webster as: having or showing a good understanding of how people should be treated (

The Internet

When you look at the internet it is hard to imagine that someone can know something that any other user on the internet can’t find. You can password protect that information, but passwords can be evaded. I would hope that it is realized by my opponent. Yes there will always be people who know more on a topic, but special, exclusive, enlightenment is a thing of the past.

Code of Laws

A code of laws lays out a process by which people should be treated. In modern countries (even Russia ) it is possible to find their code of law. The full US Code is online ( ) and lays out how people are to be treated in legal matters in the US. Sure this code doesn't deal with all legal matters but states have their own codes (ex: which are accesable to the public.


All business have policy on how employees and customers are to be treated which can all be found on public record. None of this information can be legally hidden from the public especially if a company is public All of apples governing documents are found online so the way it operates and treats people as a result of that governance is all public. And if any company doesn't treat employees well, suddenly its front page news.


Well I look forward to my respectable opponents arguments and I wish him the best of luck.


"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance." -Confucius (

I thank my opponent for this debate. I will confess that even in a "loosely structured debate", I am a stickler for structure. I will try to be a bit "loose", but I may not succeed very well. (I may also come off as a bit brash, and I apologize in advance.)

Now before I begin my arguments, I will set up a quick resolution analysis. What am I, as the PRO, arguing for?
The resolution states the THE ILLUMINATI IS REAL. As we have seen from both my and my opponent's definitions, the Illuminati are people who claim to have knowledge that others do not. So I, as the PRO, are arguing that such people are real. They are not fictitious, they are not imagined. They are concrete.

With that in mind, let's move to my main arguments. Since, according to my opponent in round 1, I should not respond to his points until round 4, I will only be making points to support my side.

As the definition of Illuminati states, these are people who "claim" to have higher knowledge. Note that it does not state that they "do" have higher knowledge.
"claim" as a verb, according to oxford dictionaries, is to "State or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof." (
So, when we say that the Illuminati is real, we say that such people who believe (without proof) that they have hidden knowledge actually exist.

This point should be "evidence of people claiming to possess higher knowledge", but for the purpose of rebuttals, the shorter tagline will do.
There are many examples of people or entities who claim to have higher intelligence or knowledge of something than others.
The Church in 16th and 17th century. (
King George III during the Revolutionary War. (
Even Barack Obama. (
These are just some of the examples of people who believed that they were smarter than others. There are many more throughout history, and even in the present.

In conclusion, I, as the PRO, am arguing that there is such things as people who claim to have more intelligence than others, and there is evidence of such people.
For this reason, I stand that The illuminati is Real
Debate Round No. 2


ceaser8901 forfeited this round.


"Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!" - Isaiah 5:21 (KJV)

Since my opponent forfeited this round, I would like to quickly (less than 200 words, I promise) go over my position so that the voters may see why they should vote for PRO.

Basically, as the definitions go, what my opponent and I have agreed is that this resolution is as follows: "There exist such people that think they are smarter that others".
This point alone should be enough to show that a PRO vote is warranted. Even if there are no examples in literature (there are), modern news (there are), or any website out there (there are... multiple times), just looking at the people around you should prove this fact.
As a general rule, most humans think themselves to be smarter than everyone else in the world.
I admit to being one of these people. This isn't necessarily a fault, just a reminder that we are human.

Because of all of this, we can see and easily conclude that yes, The illuminati is real.
Debate Round No. 3


Yes my opponent is right and I do agree with him. And I will apologize for forfeiting due to unforeseen cur stances. His point on claim and are did convince me of his side and Ill say this: vote pro, he won and deserves it. If any one does want to debate if the illuminati is real using this definition of illuminati: a Bavarian secret society founded in 1776, organized like the Freemasons, still exist today just message me and I would be happy to.


I am very sorry that this debate turned out in a way you did not expect. I actually feel pretty bad for twisting the resolution like that. Unfortunately, we have no further rounds to redefine the terms.
As I said before: definitions, definitions, definitions! That's just a helpful tip for you in the future.

Good luck with your new debate.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by snapcaster23 3 years ago
illuminati says enlightenment not enlightened. Also, the webster dictionary of enlightenment is not the state of being enlightened but "the state of having knowledge or understanding : the act of giving someone knowledge or understanding."
Posted by lannan13 3 years ago
Please challenge me the debate and I will accept your challenge. I would accept your debate, but I apparently do not meet your standards.
No votes have been placed for this debate.