True debaters never lie, or qoute liars, as a source of truth.
Debate Rounds (3)
walk the plank,
Quote the unknown
swear to another's moan.
I already talked about this, in my debate http://www.debate.org...
This debate is a source of truth because I pushed the boundaries of traditional debating by talking about debates themselves and by examining the criteria to evaluate debates, exposing them to amusing (yet meaningful) comments. Pushing the boundaries (in that case) meant in some sense, escaping debates, thus being able to acquire truth.
"True debaters" do lie, or quote liars, maybe not consciously, but they do, i also explain that in my other debate
You can be truthful, by leaving a debate or by pushing against its boundaries.
I can prove that even debates can be false themselves:
Check this debate.
"Pro is not going to win this debate". Now, who won? Pro. 14 points to 0.
In this case it wasn't even Pro who lied. The voters turned his words into lies by making him win. So what is important in a debate? Once again, it's not truth. It's credibility: having people believe that you are right. So debaters can still lie if they are believable.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.