The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Hoppi
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

absolute

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: 4/7/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 449 times Debate No: 89293
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

vi_spex

Pro

it takes resistance to resist the snake in front of me, for it has both head tail and mid, like a pyramid with no less then 3 sides, for 3 sides it takes for top bottom and mid.
Hoppi

Con

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:

resistance: the capacity to withstand something, esp the body's natural capacity towithstand disease (1)
resist: to refrain or abstain from, especially with difficulty or reluctance (2)

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.

(1) http://www.dictionary.com...
(2) http://www.dictionary.com...
(3) https://www.biblegateway.com...;
(4) http://www.sciencedirect.com...;
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

it was a real snake man :)

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..
Hoppi

Con

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.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

3 sides it takes for top bottom and mid
Hoppi

Con

We are animals. We react, and at times our reaction precedes our awareness. We cannot help but react to snakes. Even people who think they are not afraid have a strong neural reaction to snakes, no doubt as a result of an ancient evolutionary relationship (1). That is why snakes feature in so much art throughout history, are feared and revered as gods, are symbols for evil and temptation (as I mentioned before).

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.

(1)http://www.sciencedirect.com...
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
np, anytime :)
Posted by Hoppi 1 year ago
Hoppi
Thanks for the debate, vi_spex.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
i make a new one if you wanna try again
No votes have been placed for this debate.