The Instigator
Jakrakan
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
CJKAllstar
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

This House Believes That Jakrakan Is Truely An Immortal Being

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 2 votes the winner is...
CJKAllstar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/15/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 491 times Debate No: 54741
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Jakrakan

Pro

First of all, I would like to highlight that I personally have proof that Jakrakan is an immortal being, for I am him. I never die, and so am immortal. I'm not quite sure what else there is to say...?
CJKAllstar

Con

I accept the debate. BOP is fully on Jakrakan, so I cannot state any contentions. I argue that the floor realises that BOP is fully on the claimant and that my position is simply to negate any points so I can automatically win. Jakrakan, state your case.
Debate Round No. 1
Jakrakan

Pro

I have no BOP whatsoever. This 'CJKAllstar' is clearly some mortal being you doesn't have anything better to do. I suggest he stops meddling with immortals' affairs and concentrates on his own mortal life.

As for the proof that I am in fact immortal: The opposition has never seen me die, and so cannot say that I am mortal. I think that you will find the BOP is on you.
CJKAllstar

Con

Jakrakan, you do not know how debating works. In the resolution, you made a claim. That you are an immortal being. I do not have to argue that you aren't, I simply have to negate any claim you make so that the resolution is false. If the resolution is proved false, then your whole argument automatically collapses and I have won. I have not said or made the assertion that you are not an immortal being in this debate, thefore I have not created any preponderance of evidence that must be met. You are the claim-maker, and in any normal debate, you have BOP. Failure to meet your BOP means your resolution is automatically debated my job is completed.

As for your argument, it is the fallacy of the argument from ignorance[1]. Syllogistically, you have said.

"Immortality is not dying.
You have not seen me die.
Therefore I am immortal."

With that logic, I could say:

"Helping someone requires not being a bad person.
You have not seen me being bad.
Therefore I help people."

Or even:

"Destroying the planet requires not being weak.
You have not seen me being weak.
Therefore I can destroy the planet."

I would appreciate if the floor could state in the comments which, but this is a succinct logical fallacy. It is possible to have not died yet, and be immortal. I believe this is a variant of affirming a disjunct but I will appreciate if the floor could correct me.

But my point is it is a fallacious argument. It does not stand and you have not met any BOP that you are immortal. I would request that you declare when you came to be in existence and more information about how you actually exist. Else, victory for this debate now lies with me with the resolution having no case.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Jakrakan

Pro

OK. Quite clearly you do not understand what I am saying to you. You clearly do not 'get' what I am trying to say. This is simply because you are a puny mortal trying to understand the affairs of an immortal. Obviously you wouldn't understand. I have proved that I am immortal, and have therefore cleared my BOP, only a true immortal would understand. You, however, can never truly understand.
CJKAllstar

Con

Jakrakan's argument is clearly the most fallacious garbage that could come out of a supposed immortal. He made facetious assertions which I took down and did nothing else but asset nonsense. I urge the floor to side with the sensible side, not the illogical and bizarre side of this debate. I have negated your arguments leaving you with an unfulfilled BOP. Therefore, I have won and I urge the floor to take this into consideration.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Teemo 2 years ago
Teemo
Jakrakan uninstall.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by NiamC 2 years ago
NiamC
JakrakanCJKAllstarTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: This is one of the stupidest debates I have seen. Nevertheless, pro did not fulfill the BoP at ALL. Conduct obviously goes to Con. Con was also able to negate basically everything Pro had said. Con also used one source: WIKIPEDIA! This has been a very awful debate to read. At least Con did a better job than Pro.
Vote Placed by TheEpicGlassesGuy 2 years ago
TheEpicGlassesGuy
JakrakanCJKAllstarTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Jakrakan did not fulfil his BOP and CJKAllstar used sources and had a better argument as a whole.