The Instigator
philosphical
Pro (for)
Losing
24 Points
The Contender
Amphibian
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points

if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it still make a sound?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/23/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 8,170 times Debate No: 6961
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (28)
Votes (10)

 

philosphical

Pro

Hey before accepting this debate please put in the comment box whether you want to be pro or con so i can change it before we begin. i will argue either side. If you wish to be con just accept this debate and we will proceed with your opening argument. Thankyou :)
Amphibian

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for debating.

The tree that falls in the forest will not make any sound if there is no one around to hear it. In fact that tree might as well not exist. Existence is only a result of human awareness, we are the cause of everything we see, hear, feel, or smell. If we had a nuclear holocaust that killed every human in the universe then the universe would cease to exist. Awareness is a requirement for existence. So the tree never even fell, it was simply discovered as having fallen. Without awareness travel through the fourth dimension is impossible. So while the tree is laying on the ground when you find it there was never a fall and so no sound.
Debate Round No. 1
philosphical

Pro

Thankyou amphibian for accepting this debate. it should be fairly interesting.

EXISTENCE

My opponent took an interesting approach to this subject. apparently if we weren't aware of something happening it never actually happened until we find it in that state of cause afterwards.

so i ask my opponent this: what if you knew this tree? saw it every day before leaving school or work. this tree has stood tall and mighty in your yard for the ten years. one day you come home from school or work and find your tree has fallen over surrounded by a display of woodchips. since you were not personally aware that your tree was falling down when you were at work/school, does it mean it did not make a sound when it fell, simply beacause you did not hear it? you knew the tree was there standing up before you left. And when you were not aware, that tree didn't exist you say. If you have never been to china but hear many things about it, does it simply not exist because you have never seen it? we know that objects make a sound when they fall, so why should we say that they dont make a noise simply because they were out of hearing range?

Back to the fourth dimension.
you say "So while the tree is laying on the ground when you find it there was never a fall and so no sound."

but you knew this tree well before to have always stood strong and firm, as trees do, until you return to see it on the ground. and the only solution to made here is that the tree did indeed fall. arguing your side, you could say the same about any other thing in the world. the second you turn around and are unaware your partner could sprout mickey mouse ears, which will instantly disappear the second you are aware of him again. what what evidence would prove that these things are happening only the second we are unaware?

Thankyou mr. amphibian for accepting this debate. i look forward to your rebuttal.
Amphibian

Con

It does not matter who the individual is, it only matters that the falling tree lies within a humans frame of reference. If I had been very familiar with this tree and had known that it had been standing earlier then I would be aware only that it would have made a sound had I been there. Our awareness has to encompass the tree at the time of the action or else we only see a tree that was once standing.

As for my partner sprouting Mickey mouse ears. The suggested flux would only occur if there were no human present. My partner is a human so this is impossible. If we were talking about stone sprouting Mickey mouse ears it would still not happen nothing would, it would temporarily cease to exist. Like the philosopher George Berkeley said "The objects of sense exist only when they are perceived."

It does not matter how it happened it only matters that is is. You can assume anything you want when you see a fallen tree but the only truth is that the tree is not standing.
Debate Round No. 2
philosphical

Pro

well if thats the case then technically this debate doesn't even exist the second you are unawaree of it.
how does it make any sense that objects would disappear due to un-awareness? and why would objects cease to exist due to un-awareness?
This is what i meant by saying your partner could sprout mickey mouse ears. anything could happen for that reason due to unawareness. there could be an orb floating in the back of you head placed just at a spot where it would be impossible to see, but you would simply be unaware of it there. But that wouldn't mean that there is in fact not an orb there. what i am trying to say is there would have to be a point for all this.
what would the point of things ceasing to exist due to unawareness be? really there is none. in that sense maybe santa clause exists. maybe there is a dragon living beneath the earths crust. the only problem is, there would simply be no point in saying all these things are happening unless, we were aware of them happening.

how could we say the tree doesn't exist just because we have never seen the tree or heard it fall, and know its there, while also knowing that there is an unknown world that makes every thing cease to exist the second you are unaware of it? the thought doesn't make sense, and we have no way of validating that it does, just like in the case of friend with mickey mouse ears sprouting out of his head every time you turned away and were not aware of them.
thankyou for this debate it has been fairly interesting
Amphibian

Con

Thank you for your response, this has been an interesting debate.

I did not mean that it is utterly gone when there is no one near it. What I meant was that fourth dimensional travel is impossible without a human being present. It is true that you cannot prove or disprove some things, that is why this is philosophy and not science. So not only would sound not exist because sound requires the recognition from the human ear but it would not exist because of the time flux that occurs every time it is outside the spectrum of awareness. So it is impossible for the tree to make a sound or even to make a senseless vibration. Sound is a sense and exists only when a person is there to perceive it with their sensory receptors and to recognize what has happened.
Debate Round No. 3
28 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
all praise mighty rangerfootballclub!
Posted by rangersfootballclub 7 years ago
rangersfootballclub
your welcome , hundreds of years debating this i just solved it .

me - 1 mankind - 0
Posted by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
yes you just saved the world with your mighty intellagence about trees and video camera's. thanks to you we will all live another day
Posted by rangersfootballclub 7 years ago
rangersfootballclub
I am quite aware of them and so are a lot of people because it was humans that invented these signals to be recived by human devices. but they arent alive.

now i would be interested to see if somebody can find that my theory which i posted 2 comments ago is not true etc . any opions that i have just answered the question of all time lol ?
Posted by tvann5m 7 years ago
tvann5m
Ah but radio waves flying through space. Do they not exist because humans are simply not aware of them?
Radio signals period they come in your care, but you are unaware of them until they hit your antenna and your radio picks them up.
Posted by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
hmm good speculation
Posted by rangersfootballclub 7 years ago
rangersfootballclub
how can anybody claim the world/universe would cease to exsist , if humans did ?? jsut thought i would inform you , this place has been around for millions of years , if not billions. Humans havent even been around for 100,000 years , so that fails.

Also if this tree falls and nobody hears it , say i set up a video camera in the wodds waiting for a tree to fall , and after a week or so oen does , i capture it on camera and watch it , the sounds it makes etc, i was not there when it fell , a camera was , a camera has no soul no anything , its made of materials , therefore making it part of nature ? so could you use that as a point ?
Posted by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
lol good anolagy
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
If you die of falling into a booby trap, then you didn't really die because you were never made aware that you had died.
Posted by Wii_Master_Nin 8 years ago
Wii_Master_Nin
I tried explaining this to my friends at school and they about crapped themselves lol.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by shadow835 6 years ago
shadow835
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
philosphicalAmphibianTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by PostInsanity 7 years ago
PostInsanity
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by bookwormbill111 8 years ago
bookwormbill111
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by philosphical 8 years ago
philosphical
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Super-Combo 8 years ago
Super-Combo
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by trendem 8 years ago
trendem
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Wii_Master_Nin 8 years ago
Wii_Master_Nin
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by 106627 8 years ago
106627
philosphicalAmphibianTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:30