Debate Rounds (3)
It seems at first a truism that it takes resistance to resist something. Just as it takes acceptance to accept something, or it takes love to love something. However, in this case it is not a truism because although resistance and resist are similar words, that have distinct meanings in the current context:
resist: The snake represents temptation, as it does in the story in Genesis (3). To resist the snake is to refuse to give in to temptation. Resistance, on the other hand, refers to a physiological toughness. As we know, psychological traits and therefore human choices and behaviors are a function of physiology (4). Resisting temptation, then, may require a sort of resilience (or resistance) analogous to the resilience the body might display to protect itself from disease.
Pro has argued that it takes resistance to resist the snake in front of him. It does not. The snake is mental representation and has not absolute existence. We can know this because snakes are not like pyramids, and only two-dimensional pyramids have three sides. Two dimensional pyramids do not exist in the real world, which is three dimensional.
A feather would be unaffected by the snake. This is not because the feather has resistance, but because it is unable to form a mental representation of the sort of snake that Pro describes, or indeed of any snake. Resistance is not essential for resisting the snake.
sry i made mistake with it, so its a bit confusing what i mean perhaps
what i mean is, it takes resistance to defend against a snake for it has both head tail and mid.. with no head no need to defend
i conceed this one..
a triangle has 3 sides, and a pyramid has top bottom and mid..
Pro argues that it takes resistance to resist the real snake, because it has head, tail and mid, as does a triangle.
And yet, even though a triangle has head, tail and mid, there is no need to resist it. It is harmless. Therefore, I think that it is not these properties in themselves that are creating a situation that requires resisting.
If there was a snake in front of me, I might reel back in horror. Why? What is the essence of snakiness that my brain recognizes even before I'm conscious of what i've seen?
I trust and distrust my unconscious mind. It keeps me alive, it's true, but also leads me to want and do things that are not supported by my aesthetic values or by the laws of reason. That is why, however the brain responds to snakes, it's unlikely to be anything as reasonable and conscious as head mid tail.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.