The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
KingofEverything
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

describing any single thing is sufficient to define existence

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 1 vote the winner is...
KingofEverything
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/17/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 310 times Debate No: 81101
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

vi_spex

Pro

the rock in my hand=hard=dense=inanimate=nature=grey=heavy
KingofEverything

Con

In what way does describing a rock's properties define something's existence? How does saying that a rock is gray and heavy tell us the definition of existence.

Since vi_spex is saying that any single thing is sufficient to define existence, I will be showing that this isn't true.

Anything: (my definition) Literally anything

Can describing the angle of a goal post define existence? How does this tell us how or why we exist?
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

the properties of a rock exist.. a stone being grey, it is neither black and white or a colour to my eyes

describing a goal post is defining existence
KingofEverything

Con

All Pro does is claim that a goal post define existence without even showing so, and so does his other claim.

Until my opponent refutes my argument, I will not post a new one.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

are you trying to argue that rocks and goal posts dont exist?
KingofEverything

Con

No. But how do they define what existence is? Just because a rock exists doesn't mean it's the meaning of existence. Existence is an effect which was caused either by the Big Bang Theory or God.
Debate Round No. 3
vi_spex

Pro

describing a rock is defining existence

you are con.. you show me why describing a rock is not defining existence

can be, is not, so life is not can be
KingofEverything

Con

I already did, whilst you have provided no arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
vi_spex

Pro

so describing a rock is not defining existence? ..
KingofEverything

Con

Yeah. I extend my case.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by KingofEverything 1 year ago
KingofEverything
What?
Posted by palmertio0 1 year ago
palmertio0
NOOoOOOO Y U T8K B8 M8
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
a stone is not life as defined by describing a stone
Posted by NateTheFirst 1 year ago
NateTheFirst
What do you mean by "Sufficient to define existence"?
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
hmm telling me what it is, is telling me what it is not
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
vi_spexKingofEverythingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro just fails to prove anything. Beyond assertion, his argument really doesn't go anywhere. Con's responses bolster the basic questions as to how Pro is managing to affirm the resolution, and there's no clear means by which he does so. Hence, I vote Con.