You Do Not Exist
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
MOV_8556.MOV
Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
Started: | 8/26/2014 | Category: | Philosophy | ||
Updated: | 3 years ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
Viewed: | 833 times | Debate No: | 60936 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)
Your objective if you choose to accept is to reason that you exist. My objective if you choose to except is to reason that you do not exist.
Rules: 1. You are allowed 3 points for your evidence of existence. (I.E., I exist because A, B, and C) and you may not add more points, you must stick to the points you choose. 2. You may use quotes and citations however you may not chop up paragraphs. If you choose to use a citation you must use the entire paragraph so that people do not have to factcheck your interpretation. It makes it easier for judging. If for some reason the paragraph is too long or the context is not clear you must at least incorporate four sentences so it's not a guessing game. Format: R1P: Your Opening Argument R2C: My Rebuttal R2P: Your Defense and/or Rebuttal R3C: My Rebuttal and Close R3P: Your Rebuttal and Close Yes, you get an extra round to lay the framework for your three points. This is intentional. This is for fun so don't get to frustrated if you take it on. :D
I believe I exist because (A) I can touch/feel others and they can touch/feel me. (B) I can think. If we did not exist we would not have complete thoughts or be able to function and do things like talking and eating. (C) There is no real reasoning to believe we don't exist. |
![]() |
(A) Nothing more than tactile illusions (http://www.newscientist.com...). "You" believe you are being touched because you believe you exist and therefore as a pawn in the universe are granted the same falsehoods as all others including "touch" however you never actually touch anything (http://www.liveleak.com...) particularly because "You" are a collection of particles manipulated to produce a phenomena.
(B) You do not "Think" but instead react (http://io9.com...) which means in essence that your belief that you think and function is false as you are just a phenomena produced and reacting as a phenomena should; "You" exist only in the sense of being a collection of atoms playing out what a collection of atoms would play out if they were in "Your" circumstances no different than an ice cube melting from being near a high temperature. As such you do not have complete thoughts and your functionality is nothing more than the prolonged standard reaction of such a phenomenon as you. (C) There is no reason to believe that a collection of atoms produces an "individual" versus a proposed standard for natural progression. Atoms exist. The Universe exists. All things contained of both exist. However the concept of a "Higher Brain" or "Sentience" do not exist, "You" do not exist, "You" are the natural progression of atoms in a deterministic universe; what "You" consider life is nothing more than just another standard phenomenon and all that "You" do is a deductive standard for the universe's progression. MOV_8556.MOV forfeited this round. |
![]() |
MOV_8556.MOV forfeited this round. |
![]() |
Post a Comment
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by blackkid 3 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by blackkid 3 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by blackkid 3 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by Mike_10-4 3 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by Mike_10-4 3 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by Erika113 3 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by MasterNate 3 years ago

Report this Comment
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 3 years ago
blackkid | MOV_8556.MOV | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 1 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: ff, but pro never made a good case for why con did not exist (he should have been more specific with possibly "an individual can be able to not exist")
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 3 years ago
blackkid | MOV_8556.MOV | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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: | 1 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for the forfeit. But as to arguments, Con gave reasons for their existence, and Pro did not refute them sufficiently--the "You" was not specified in R1 as "a thinking individual", so Pro basically conceded; he said ""You" exist only..." But that concedes that in some sense Con exists--and the individual aspect was not specified. So arguments to Con, surprisingly, given the number of forfeits here. But conduct for the forfeits.