The Instigator
Evannnn
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
nzlockie
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

This statement is false.

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...
nzlockie
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/5/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,241 times Debate No: 61319
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (15)
Votes (4)

 

Evannnn

Pro

First round is for acceptance.
nzlockie

Con

Sigh. I accept.

As PRO, BOP rests on him. If he succeeds in proving that the statement is false, he simultaneously proves that it is true, thus making it false and failing to meet his BOP.

I have no intention of running a counter argument to this debate, for obvious reasons. If my opponent can prove the resolution to be true and false at the same time, he deserves the win.
If he fails, not only must he concede the debate, but he must promise to never argue this resolution again.

Good luck!
Debate Round No. 1
Evannnn

Pro

Thank you for accepting.

This statement is false: This website does not exist.

Because we are currently debating on this website, it must exist.

Thank you Con, I look forward to an interesting debate.
nzlockie

Con

I have no idea what my opponent is doing here. The resolution is, "This statement is false."

By submitting that resolution, did he think that he was going to be able to select a number of false statements and then argue those?
He needs to argue the original resolution, not some random one he thinks up on the second round because he realises that he hold BOP for a paradox.

I submit no contest to his second round and await him to begin arguing the resolution. His BOP has not been met.
Debate Round No. 2
Evannnn

Pro

Definition of THIS in the context of the resolution: The idea that is present or near that has just been mentioned.

Using this definition, we can rewrite the resolution, and still have the same meaning:
The idea that is present or near that has just been mentioned is false.

The idea that is present or near is this: This website does not exist.

Therefore, this is what we are debating about.
nzlockie

Con

Ahh, this clears things up considerably.

It appears that my opponent DID in fact intend to make up his resolution as he went. A smart strategy to be sure, since his opposition would have no idea what they were opposing until well after the debate is under way.
When I was a kid, I used to employ a similar strategy. It was called, "I'll ask you a question and you have to say yes, OK?". Oh the fun we used to have. Turns out my brother likes farts, wants to marry farts and IS a fart.

Sadly those carefree days are behind us now, and this is supposed to be a serious debate. As such, there are certain constructs one expects to find, the first and foremost of which is a clear indication of the motion to be debated. PRO made, what appeared to be, a complete resolution in the form of a philosophical statement complete with definitions.
I accepted his challenge and I now demand that he argue this resolution or concede the debate to me.

I will even be happy for him to use this final round to present arguments as I have already stated that I have no intention of running a counter argument.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
Evannnn

Pro

Alright. Since I am not a giver-upper, and I made it my goal to attempt to defend the impossible through any means possible, I shall continue.

Because Con has not run a single counter argument this entire time, I have come to the conclusion that I win the debate automatically.


nzlockie

Con

Thank you PRO for setting this debate up.

The resolution was that: "This statement is false."
PRO presented no argument that addressed this resolution directly or indirectly. As both PRO and instigator, BOP rests firmly with him. He has not met his BOP and has therefore lost this debate.

I'm sorry that the debate did not play out the way he intended and I commend him for concluding the debate in the way he has. I wish him luck for the future and urge you all to submit a CON vote on this debate.

Thanks!
Debate Round No. 4
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Evannnn 2 years ago
Evannnn
Intresting. I guess I never considered that fact that it might not actually be impossible to defend in the first place.

The liars paradox has been considered a paradox in society for so long that I didn't even think outside of the box D:
Posted by blackkid 2 years ago
blackkid
Actually you could have won.

This isn't a paradox. "This statement is false.", if the statement it's false it just extends rather than contradicts into "It is true that this statement is false." It's because it's a deductive statement that this is possible; a paradox cannot be made out of a deductive statement without an external element that causes the paradox.
Posted by Evannnn 2 years ago
Evannnn
It was impossible to defend in the first place.
Posted by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
Well I am glad you accomplished your goal of eradicating your boredom.

Your premise is impossible to defend because you altered the resolution in the second round.
Posted by Evannnn 2 years ago
Evannnn
Listen, can't you cut me some slack here? I am trying to defend something that is IMPOSSIBLE to defend after all.

To be honest, I've actually accomplished my goal of fixing my boredom, as I'm not really bored anymore!
Posted by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
Well let's recap.

Title: "This statement is false. "

Round One: "First round is for acceptance. "

Round Two: "Thank you for accepting.
This statement is false: This website does not exist. ......"

Well golly gee, it would seem the first mention of your alleged premise "this website does not exist" has not been mentioned until the second round of this debate. After acceptance by Con.

It would seem Pro is dumb.
Posted by Evannnn 2 years ago
Evannnn
1. Don't be hostile, as I said, I am merely trying to defend something that cannot be defended, as I mentioned earlier.
2. My resolution is still the same, no matter how much you repeat otherwise.
2. Explain how "This website does not exist" was not present until round two. PROVE it.
3. No, You're dumb.
Posted by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
How is ""This website does not exist" present, when it is not listed anywhere in the Title, or Round 1.

Con has no idea that is your premise until you post it AFTER Con has already accepted the debate.

1.That is a change of resolution.
2. "This website does not exist" was not present until Round 2
3. You're dumb.
Posted by Evannnn 2 years ago
Evannnn
1. I did not change my resolution, it has been the same as it ever was: This statement is false.

Just because the statement referred to is "This website does not exist" does not mean whatsoever that I have changed my resolution.

2. There are many statements present at any one time. Whos to say that the statement "This website does not exist" was not present at the time my resolution was posted?

3. As I said before, no need for insults.
Posted by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
Changing the resolution is not defending it.

"The idea that is present or near that has just been mentioned."

Present or near. At the time of debate acceptance, there was no other statement present. Boredom is not an excuse for a lack of debate skills.

So in regards to your daily life, I am sure you are an educated person. In regards to this debate....you are dumb.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
EvannnnnzlockieTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never defended the resolution and instead chose to attempt and change it. It's usually a good ideal to defend your resolution in a debate instead if attempting to swap it out.
Vote Placed by MasturDebatur 2 years ago
MasturDebatur
EvannnnnzlockieTied
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: BoP rested on Pro, not to sure what the hell was going on until he defined everything clearly.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
EvannnnnzlockieTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has BOP
Vote Placed by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
EvannnnnzlockieTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did a horrible job defending the premise