Two can be one
Debate Rounds (4)
Champion123 forfeited this round.
Pro claims that one is the 'founder' of all numbers and that while 1 is an independent entity all the other numbers are contingent on 1. Thus, the number 2 is merely two 1s, and the number 100 is made up of 1s such that it couldn't exist without 1s.
Here is the flaw in Pro's argument. While 2 is made up of 1s, and 100 is made up of 1s, that's only because we are conceptualising it in terms of 1s. We could just as easily think of '2' as four halves, and 1 as two halves. Consider: "Since 2 is so proud, then i will remove my 1. 2- 1= 1. You see i still have my 1 back." changed to "Since 1 is so proud, then i will remove my 1/2. 1- 1/2= 1/2. You see i still have my 1/2 back."
So therefore, whatever number is dependent on another number depends one how you frame the problem. You could think of 2 as 2x1, or 2 as 4x1/2, or 2 as 100/50 or 2 as -1x-2. It's relative. Therefore, 1 is not the foundation of all the other numbers and Pro's claims are false.
Here's what I would have argued:
Mathematical proof that 2 = 1.
1: Step 1: Let a = b.
Step 2: Then a^2 = ab
Step 3: a^2 + a^2 = a^2 + ab
Step 4: 2a^2 = a^2 + ab
Step 5: 2a^2 - 2ab = a^2 + ab -2ab
Step 6: 2a^2 - 2ab = a^2 - ab
Step 7: This can be written as 2(a^2 - ab) = 1(a^2 - ab)
Step 8: and cancelling the (a^2 - ab) from both sides gives 1=2.
Figure out the flaw without looking online. :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 3 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||5|
Reasons for voting decision: I honestly don't fully understand Pro's argument. If it's what Con took it to mean - 1 is the base number on which all other numbers are dependent - then Con disproved this by showing Pro's logic is arbitrary. Many numbers could conceivably be this base number and nothing changes but our perspective. Pro's marriage analogy is both odd and a last round addition and thus irrelevant. Con disproved Pro's case and did much of the work for him in making it palatable to the audience, so arguments to Con. Conduct for the forfeit and Grammar for the confusing nature of Pro's case.
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.