Debate Rounds (5)
What an unusual topic of discussion, is this due to some philosophical view? or troll?
We can both accept, respect, acknowledge and perhaps appreciate that we can 'see', touch, taste, and if needed... do something in order to produce a vibration and in turn... hear the piece of material in question. this, "Mirror"
the question comes from jaden Smith but i understand it.
surre i can pick something up and bang on it and experience that its real beyond just grabbing and touching it with my hands
how about this. If someone claimed to have been abducted by aliens, but can't show they have been. if they truly believe they have, they would experience the same trauma as if they actually did.
Why would our eyes not be real? if I gave you the definition for an eye,
1. each of a pair of globular organs of sight in the head of humans and vertebrate animals.
And I gave you the definition for organ...
1. a part of an organism which is typically self-contained and has a specific vital function.
I would first argue that eyes do exist and show literally any human diagram ever in support of my argument, I would also suggest that by you understanding what I am writing means you have eyes.
And something with a highly accurate reflection doesn't need to be false just because you may not be able to see, or presume that eyes are not real.
The more I talk about this topic the more I feel stubborn for taking it on board, and the more I feel insulted that you would question something like that to me.
If you have any other actual questions though. then by all means. I can answer them.
Just keep in mind that I will pick up any logical fallacy you put forward and show the ignorance if you happen to express it.
when have i said our eyes arnt real?
Umm... right there. Do not claim to not have suggested something after literally creating a debate topic about it and attempting to defend it lmao.
Lets talk about the philosophy of a mirror though...
It's a reflective glass that allows us to look at it. People could make it poetic or ask what colour a mirror is, perhaps what a mirror would look like in a box.
Or another issue is. If you had an enclosed box that had walls of mirror.... OR, a sphere, but on the inside of a hollowed out spherical mirror.
If a light particle was to materialise inside and project itself onto the mirror, how long would the light last for?
Evidence - the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
Either way, there is no evidence suggesting eyes do not exist and if you ask the question, you have the burden of proof.
Christopher Hitchens once said "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
If you suggest something, you're required to show me evidence. If I said, you're not human... I am required to show you how you're not.
If you say, something like 'how can mirrors be real, if our eyes arnt real?'
You are required to show me how in any possible way, whether joking or asking something philosophically, how eyes are actually not real. You can't then say 'did I actually say it?' Because it doesn't matter what you said, you proposed something. It's YOUR responsibility to show me.
Anyway, it was fun talking to you.
how can mirrors be real, if our eyes arnt real?
You have not bothered addressing any of my claims nor made any your self, you are still required to address ALL of them and make your own before I am required to continue. By definition, I could end with a full stop (period) .
On this round and still have a better argument than your first statement. which, might I add, is the same thing you said for your title. Have a good day bro :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Preston 1 year ago
|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:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: pro proved nothing
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.