The Instigator
Whataburger
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Vocem-Mendacii
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

You should vote for me.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/24/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 479 times Debate No: 68877
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Whataburger

Pro

Consider this, with just a little bit of lime juice and some finely chopped cilantro, any plain ol' cucumber can become a delicious treat. Although I do suppose we ought to consider that cucumbers are pretty good by themselves as well.

In this debate I will aim to show that I, Whataburger, should get the vote in this debate.

Now remember to brush your teeth people. Cavities will form if you don't, and it'll be difficult to enjoy a Whataburger without anything to chew with.
Vocem-Mendacii

Con

Pro states that he should get the vote in this debate, yet he does not provide any logical reason for why that's the case. Let's attempt to analyze pro's arguments to see if they are valid.

Argument 1:
P1. Cucumbers are delicious
C. Whataburger should get the vote

The conclusion does not follow from the premise: whether or not Whataburger should get the vote has no relation to whether or not cucumbers are delicious: cucumbers were always delicious, before Whataburger was even born.
Debate Round No. 1
Whataburger

Pro

(a) There's no reason to believe that the debate had started before Con posted his argument, and (b) the weighing mechanism of this debate isn't logic. The cucumber talk was just for fun. Also, they're delicious

There are some basic assumptions about debate underlying Con's advocacy that need to be questioned. You question those assumptions by voting against him in this debate. The role of the ballot is to break away from boxed out methodologies and change debate for the better.
Vocem-Mendacii

Con

There's no reason to believe that the debate had started before Con posted his argument

Actually, the debate has started as PRO has already typed an argument for his case.

The role of the ballot is to break away from boxed out methodologies and change debate for the better.


This is untrue: voting is for getting the general opinion on something, not to change opinion. Also, logic is not a boxed-out methodology; everything is based on logic, so pro needs to destroy everything in order to win.
Debate Round No. 2
Whataburger

Pro

The universe is based on chaos. Everything is arbitrary and logic is the flawed method people used to make sense of a senseless world. I'm not saying logic is bad, or that I don't use logic, instead that you should not assume this debate should be weighed on logic.

What Con is doing here is flat-out boring. He's making assumptions about how debate operates and to default that those assumptions are truth harms our activity.

Con never contests that this harmful. Vote for Pro to create change.
Vocem-Mendacii

Con

Vocem-Mendacii forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Whataburger

Pro

Whataburger forfeited this round.
Vocem-Mendacii

Con

Debate is a discussion based on logic. If this debate were to be not based on logic, it is not a debate; this means that pro cannot receive a vote: you cannot vote on a nonexistent debate.

Illogicality is harmful because without logic rabbits are an the big to do a.
Debate Round No. 4
Whataburger

Pro

1) Con drops that the universe is based on Chaos.

2) You can't claim debate is about just one thing. Some of the most break-neck policy debates are far from logical and many public debates are pure pathos. Debate is not inherently s logical entity.

3) Remember the role of the ballot. Break away from these arbitrary metrics and promote real education.

(also, Con's last argument is about as circular as it can get. There's never a warrant offered as to why debate is a discussion of logic.)
Vocem-Mendacii

Con

Vocem-Mendacii forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
This isn't a debate, but it was in the debate section.
Posted by Whataburger 2 years ago
Whataburger
All I talk about is change and you can't find any cents?
Posted by rethaluious 2 years ago
rethaluious
404: sense in this debate not found.
No votes have been placed for this debate.