The Instigator
GarretKadeDupre
Pro (for)
Winning
20 Points
The Contender
Xgator
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

You Are RationalMadman

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 5 votes the winner is...
GarretKadeDupre
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/1/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 808 times Debate No: 29786
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

GarretKadeDupre

Pro

I await acceptance to present my opening arguments.
Xgator

Con

I will accept!
Debate Round No. 1
GarretKadeDupre

Pro

Thank you for accepting, RationalMadman. I hope we can finish this debate before you get banned again. That's why I set the response time to 25 minutes.

I will now prove that you are, indeed, RationalMadman.

Argument from irrational analogy

P1: RationalMadman exists.
P2: You exist.

Thus, you are RationalMadman.

Argument from rational ignorance

P1: There is no proof that you are not RationalMadman

Thus, you are RationalMadman.

Argument from RationalMadman's Razor

P1: The simplest possible explanation for things is true
P2: The simplest possible explanation for anything is RationalMadman

Thus, you are RationalMadman.

Argument from intuition

P1: You are RationalMadman.

Thus, you are RationalMadman.

Argument from RationalMadman

P1: You told me you are RationalMadman.

Thus, you are RationalMadman.

I await your rebuttals. Good luck, RationalMadman.
Xgator

Con

My opponent states that I am Rational Madman. I do exist, but is there proof that Rational Madman does exist? Probably, since I searched it up on Google. Am I Rational Madman? No. I am not rational.
Debate Round No. 2
GarretKadeDupre

Pro

Thanks for your sorry attempt at trolling, RationalMadman. I will now refute the failure that is you.

I should emphasize the fact that RationalMadman has already conceded the resolution in the first sentence of the previous round. I quote: "[...] I am Rational Madman."

RationalMadman has also conceded that he exists. He also makes a (characteristic) attempt at trolling by posing the question, "[Is] there proof that [I] exist?", then proceeding to answer his own question. According to RationalMadman, there is probably proof that exists. Voters should take 'probably' to mean 'certainly.'

I will now proceed to prove the resolution further, beyond a rational doubt.

Argument from opponent's own words

P1: My opponent said, and I quote: "Am I Rational Madman? [...] Iam [...]"
P2: "I am" is not referring to the God of the Israelites.
P3: Heck, it may very well be; for all I know, RationalMadman and God are one and the same.

Thus, my opponent is RationalMadman (and also God, but that's irrelevant).

Argument from the elephant in the room

P1: There is an elephant in the room.
P2: RationalMadman is an elephant.

I think its safe to assume that you are in the room, and not outside of it. I also assume that you are an elephant; a valid assumption, I hope you agree.

Thus, you are RationalMadman.

Argument from non-contradiction

P1: You are RationalMadman.
P2: Any conclusion besides the realization that you are, in fact, RationalMadman, makes a contradiction in my flawless argument.

Thus, you are RationalMadman.

Argument from status quo

P1: The status quo says that all new users are the reincarnation of RationalMadman.
P2: My opponent just registered his account less than 30 minutes ago.

Thus, my opponent is a new user, and therefore, he is RationalMadman.

Argument from the obvious

You are obviously RationalMadman.

Argument from RationalMadman

Oh wait, RationalMadman doesn't argue, he only trolls.

Argument from madness

P1: There's a madness spreading in the forums that everyone is RationalMadman. (1)(2)(3)
P2: This madness is rational.

Thus, you are RationalMadman.

Argument from the LatentDebater

P1: LatentDebater says that Imabench is RationalMadman. (4)
P2: LatentDebater is always right.

Imabench is RationalMadman. It logically follows that Imabench lied in claiming to be a bench, since he is actually RationalMadman. If such a reputable user lied about not being RationalMadman, then everyone who claims to not be RationalMadman is a liar.

Thus, everyone is RationalMadman. Including you.

Argument from myself

P1: I'm RationalMadman.

And I'm telling you straight up that you are RationalMadman too.

Argument from an open mind

If you have an open mind, you are open to the fact that you are RationalMadman. If you claim you aren't RationalMadman, you are a bigot and a liar and a turd and RationalMadman.

Argument from contradiction

P1: RationalMadman is a contradiction.
P2: RationalMadman made that contradiction when he signed up under that name.

Therefore, RationalMadman is a contradiction maker.

P2: You aren't RationalMadman.

If you aren't RationalMadman, then you are a contradiction maker, because its pretty freaking obvious that you are RationalMadman. Therefore, you are RationalMadman.

The problem of many RationalMadmans argument

A conscious RationalMadman will create doubt to the individual that his thoughts are artificial or simulated.
There is no difference between a conscious RationalMadman and sufficiently convincing simulation of RationalMadman.
If you doubt that you are a simulation of RationalMadman, than you must be RationalMadman.

Everyone, including RationalMadman, vote PRO! Thanks RationalMadman for this eye-opening debate.


(1) http://debate.org...
(2) http://debate.org...
(3) http://debate.org...
(4) http://debate.org...







Xgator

Con

Xgator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by GarretKadeDupre 3 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
RationalMadman's greatest offense was harassing the site's hottest girl member until she left.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by OhioGary 3 years ago
OhioGary
GarretKadeDupreXgatorTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's a witch!!!! (Sorry, I needed to make that statement current with DDO.) Con's RationalMadman!!!! Points to Pro for the forfeit but the poor Contender probably does not know who RationalMadman is. The fact that I now know who he is really makes me feel sad for the time I'm spending on this website. :(
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 3 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
GarretKadeDupreXgatorTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: lol, the argument from RationalMadman's razor.
Vote Placed by Apeiron 3 years ago
Apeiron
GarretKadeDupreXgatorTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF point for Pro, and more convincing arguments since I resonate with what likespeace said below in his vote.
Vote Placed by morgan2252 3 years ago
morgan2252
GarretKadeDupreXgatorTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to pro because of FF. I know this is a joke debate, but I still have to give convincing arguments to con because (1) his words aren't as ignorant and stupid as RationalMadman's, (2) he obvously has never heard of RationalMadman because he separates the name into two separate words, and he says, "I am not rational". That is exactly the opposite of what RationalMadman put on his profile before he was banned.
Vote Placed by likespeace 3 years ago
likespeace
GarretKadeDupreXgatorTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro asserts, "P1: You told me you are RationalMadman. Thus, you are RationalMadman." Since Con does not contest this point, I must assume that it went down as Pro said. Also, Con forfeited (conduct).