Yuiru will win this debate

I believe the user "yuiru" will inevitably lose in this debate.

This user has lost multiple debates in the past, is unable to make serious arguments, intentionally uses fallacious arguments, and generally likes losing!

In fact, I do not think its even possible for yuiru to win this debate by default.

Evidence:

Lost other debates

Makes bad arguments

Is a non-human

Yuiru is going to lose!

I accept this challenge, and I will start with my opening argument since I'm the pro.

Contention 1: Voting
This simply discusses what I need to do to win. In order to, I simply need to get my opponent to win. Obviously, this is done by my losing. Therefore, if at any point in the debate I lose, I therefor win, and am proven correct.
Contention 2: I concede.
I forfeit the debate, meaning I lose automatically. As I have now lost, Yuiru has won, and the resolution is proven correct. As the resolution is correct, please vote pro :)

"Contention 1: Voting"

Yes, but you are still wining and therefore yuiru is losing!

"Contention 2: I concede."

Maybe, but Yuiru has already lost the debate!!!

"As I have now lost, Yuiru has won, and the resolution is proven correct."

If Yuiru wins then Yuiru ultimately loses!!!! This would prove the resolution incorrect!

It is impossible for Yuiru to win the resolution!

Vote pro!!!

Why you should vote pro:

Yuiru has used huge fallacious arguments!!

Performative Contradiction - Yuiru is using a self-refuting idea/paradox:
Example: "This statement is false" if it is false it is true, if its true it is false.
Yuiru's version: Yuiru debates Yuiru will lose the debate. If yuiru wins yuiru loses, if yuiru loses yuiru wins.

Ignoratio elenchi - Yuiru brings up an irrelevant issue: yuiru losing another debate in the past.

Special pleading - Yuiru assumes if they were to lose the same ad infinitum argument can not be applied.

Argumentum ad infinitum and chain reaction argument - Yuiru is arguing that he is correct because of a non-terminating process that Yuiru can not win because of.

Bidirectional causation - Yuiru argues that because wining is associated with wining, that therefore wining causes losing.

Circular reasoning/paradoxical thinking - Yuiru's argument if examined basically goes like this:
Yuiru will inevitably lose
Therefore Yuiru will lose.

False dichotomy - Yuiru asserts the only possible outcome is a win or a lose, yet ignores the possiblity of a tie!

Ad hominem argument (in multiple forms) - Yuiru claims because Yuiru is not a human, lost other debates, likes losing, and intentionally uses fallacious arguments that they will lose.

Fallacy fallacy - Yuiru assumes that because Yuiru's arguments are fallacious, Yuiru therefore should lose.

Since pro has conceded then pro has won:

Based on TheOrator's first contention, by his second contention, the only possible outcome is Yuiru losing.

Yuiru concedes pros stance:

I concede both now, in the above, and even before pro did.



I rest on my case.

C1 Rebuttal:
"Yes, but you are still wining and therefore yuiru is losing!"
Actually, as I've forfeited, there's no way in which you could lose. Even if you forfeited now it couldn't work as you don't have an opponent to forfeit to. As the loser has already been decided, you must be made the winner, and so the resolution has been upheld.

C2 Rebuttal:
"Maybe, but Yuiru has already lost the debate!!!"
Check the C1 rebuttal.

Opponent's Case:
As I conceded the argument before you posted any arguments, those arguments cannot be accepted as they were made after the round was already over. Since there is no way the argument can now progress in any other direction than Yuiru's eventual win, vote pro!.

Question to Opponent:
How do you pronounce Yuiru?

Question answer:

Yu's "u" as in You
I's "Ee" as in Pee
And Ru's "u" as in Eww
All in a breathy voice.

Yue-Ee-Rue　ユイル

or you can call me Johnny, Johnny Depp.

Join the yuiru crew!

"Actually, as I've forfeited, there's no way in which you could lose. Even if you forfeited now it couldn't work as you don't have an opponent to forfeit to. As the loser has already been decided, you must be made the winner, and so the resolution has been upheld."

But you forget on thing:

This entire debate is insolubilia!

Say for a second I was pro!

If I win, therefore the resolution is proven true, and I win... If I lose, the resolution is proven false.. and I lose.

But since I am con ,I am debating I will lose.

If I win, the resolution is proven true, meaning I lose... If I lose, there resolution is proven false, meaning I win.

It is a paradox ad infinitum.

"C2 Rebuttal:
"Maybe, but Yuiru has already lost the debate!!!"
Check the C1 rebuttal."

I said that because this debate is a double binding paradox!

"As I conceded the argument before you posted any arguments, those arguments cannot be accepted as they were made after the round was already over. Since there is no way the argument can now progress in any other direction than Yuiru's eventual win, vote pro!."

But I can not win, it is a vicious circularity of infinite regress.
In fact, I can't even lose.

And now that you have said there is no one to lose, because you have forfeited.

This means no competition and therefor no ability to lose or win.

Its a no win or lose situation because of how contradictory it is.

There is a simple solution to this paradox that Pro has failed to state, therefore it remains I can not win, and will lose this debate, thus wining, and so on ad infinitum.

Vote Pro, Con, or Tie!

Either way I DO NOT WIN!!

Let con have their way!

Although none of the Con's arguments can be accepted as I've already forfeited and he's already won, I'll clear a few things up.

On the Paradoxical Argument:
My opponent claims that this is a paradox as there is no way for him to win. However, the only for this to turn into a paradox would be if an actual argument occured over the resolution. If that were the case, then there would in fact be a paradox. However, there was no actual debate over the round. I, TheOrator, have forfeited the round. By the rules of every formal debating format that I've heard of, this means that my opponent, in this case Yuiru, will have to win. There's no way around that. As my opponent has won, the resolution is upheld, and according to the rules of this site, if the resolution is proven to be upheld (in this case by my forfeit) then the Pro has won the debate.

On the Forfeit:
My opponent states "And now that you have said there is no one to lose, because you have forfeited. This means no competition and therefor no ability to lose or win.". Although the grammar was pretty bad in that, I think it means that because I said I forfeited no one can lose or win and so the con succeeds. However, a concession means exactly the opposite. As I have conceded, I have automatically been declared the loser, and so Yuiru is declared the winner. As Yuiru has won, the Pro receives the vote.

Because I lost, vote Pro :)