The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

i can describe rainbows in the dark

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: 5/29/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 164 times Debate No: 92007
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)






Good morning/afternoon everyone,

Side Proposition has stated that truth is equal to memory. I would like to start off as defining "equal" as exactly the same, without any differences, and "truth" as the reality, and what actually happened, for side Proposition has not defined the terms.

I have three points, for you all today, to prove that truth is NOT equal to memory. The first two points will be stated in this argument, and the last one will be stated in my second argument. The first point is that people forget, and the second point is that memories can be altered. My last point will be about how two people can remember different things about the same situation.

Yes, people forget. Even if a person has the best memory on earth, it is impossible for them to know every single detail of their life from the moment they were born. I would like to ask side Proposition a question. If somebody told a person, who we'll name Joe, that he slept when he was 6 months old, but Joe doesn't remember, does that make that somebody a liar? If one does not remember something, does that mean it was never there? One does not have to remember for it to be the truth.

Even if a person remembers, they can still remember incorrectly. According to a few Iowa State University researchers, one can manipulate an existing memory simply by suggesting new or different information. Once this "existing memory" is "manipulated", does the original memory become false? Two of one's existing memories COULD merge into one, therefore becoming a memory of something that didn't happen. If a picture was showing one a childhood performance, for example, but they remember it differently, does that make the picture a lie?

Because there's such word as 'forget', and because there could be incorrect memories, truth does NOT equal memories.
Debate Round No. 1


truth is unchanging

is joe certain that he didnt sleep when he was 6 years old without memory of it? only is he honestly certain of it if he remembers

reality has no flaws.. you have no knowledge of talking unicorns

you can manupulate a believer.. you can believe your memories are false, and that stone talked to you last night

"If a picture was showing one a childhood performance, for example, but they remember it differently, does that make the picture a lie?"
truthless proposition, without memory you can not verify past.. except a scar or something.. or you are not hungry so you must have eaten something earlier..


if you are not certain of it its not knowledge..

to be able to forget something has no bearing on the truth... how do you forget it if its was false.. knowledge dosnt change, what you ate for breakfast this morning never changes


Thank you for your somewhat grammatical rebuttal and constructive speech.

I would like to start off by rebutting to side Proposition's points.

I am not quite sure what side Proposition means by "truth is unchanging", and since they didn't explain it, I can say that that rebuttal is unwarranted.

Yes, you can believe that something is the truth, but is belief the same thing as truth? In my first speech, I have defined truth as something that actually happened.

The picture is there to prove that it actually happened. Let me rephrase that question. If a Polaroid picture showed something, and one remembers otherwise, does that make the picture a lie?

I'm also not sure what side Proposition means by "knowledge = certain". Weren't we talking about memories and truths? I think side Proposition has not explained this clearly enough.

"What you ate for breakfast never changes." I actually agree with that. Yes, what one ate for breakfast never changes, but if one remember otherwise, then does one's "breakfast" become a lie?

I would have rebutted to side Proposition's arguments, but since they haven't presented any, I will continue onto my last point, which is that two or more people can remember different things about the same situation.

Let's say there are two people, Sally and Amy. They had some drinks at the party last night.

Sally remembers both of them drinking ginger ale, while Amy remembers both of them drinking beer. Only one of them is right, because they were only allowed one drink for the entire night (this may seem unrealistic, but this is just an example.)

If memory equaled truth, then they should both be right, but they can't. As I have stated above, only one of them can be right. If memory equaled truth, then this situation is impossible.

It is possible, though, and that is why memory does NOT equal the truth.
Debate Round No. 2



memory is not of something that has happend?

i said the breakfast you ate dosnt change.. truth is unchanging

"If a Polaroid picture showed something, and one remembers otherwise, does that make the picture a lie?"
this is a truthless proposition.. how would i know what no one dosnt remember about something on a picture never taken

knowledge=certain=truth=past=memory=dark=negative=turn my back=morality=death=destruction

if you remember we saw cows in an enclosure, and i remember we saw pigs, only 1 of us can be right.. so at best 1 has a belief and 1 has knowledge

only amy or sally can be right, therfore at least 1 of them is wrong


Before I start, I would like to point out some flaws in side Proposition's arguments.

First of all, there are many grammatical errors, such as "memory is not of something that has happend?" and "knowledge=certain=truth=past=memory=dark=negative=turn my back=morality=death=destruction". I'm sure you would agree that the latter example is definitely not a full sentence. Therefore, I am not quite sure what side Proposition means by this 'equation'.

Second of all, side Proposition has not presented any points, therefore almost all of their arguments are invalid.

Lastly, side Proposition has given an example about seeing pigs and cows. "At best 1 has a belief and 1 has knowledge". They also have stated that belief is false and knowledge is the truth. If memories are ALWAYS the truth, as I have defined in my first argument, then this example actually supports my side of this debate. The one with the belief is false, yet he/she remembers seeing the false creature. Seeing the false creature is not the truth, so memory does not equal truth.

Yes, only one of the two girls can be right. That was my point all along, and I have explained that above.

At the start, side Proposition argued that memory equals truth (without any backup points). I, as side Opposition, argued that memory does NOT equal truth, because people forget, memories can be changed, and that people can remember things differently. This house believes that (THBT) memories do NOT equal truth.

Thank you side proposition, judges, and audience for this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by I-DrankYourMilkShake 4 months ago
No votes have been placed for this debate.