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

imagination is the opposite of reality, not now and now

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/26/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 553 times Debate No: 76982
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)






any false answer is imaginary, and any belief is imaginary

believing that reality is true is doubting reality is true, Thus i must believe reality is false

0=nothing=information=false and truth


math is not about truth, not about past.


Debate accepted.

Now, while the initial mathematical equations outlined by Pro in his opening argument *are* considered correct--at least according to basic mathematics, the subject of reality and imagination itself is in fact a lot broader and not easily defined.

For example, if someone has said that they've seen something out of the ordinary; who do we conclude that they haven't? Because for all we know they actually may have seen that something. Reality means different things to different people and can simply not be categorized in being a certain way.

Everybody has a different one.

Here are some of the maths that I've equated:

0=a number, part of reality.

1= a number, still part of reality.

So unlike Pro has argued, both of these numbers are true.

69= reality, therefore, all numbers equal reality and are truths.
Debate Round No. 1


i can at best believe what others tell me, as i have to imagine it

belief=be lie, as i dont know is true

i dont know=i have to imagine it=i can at best imagine it

kNow=physical experience(now)

math itself is not true in that it is numbers, imaginary, imaginaiton is not true, so an equation is only true if it fits reality. we call them true

numbers dosnt exist in reality, beyond symbols i can write down to understand, numbers are like a limited language i guess..

reality is true, not truth, and not false

numbers come from our minds


Not necessarily. One example would be when people "believe" things that are actually based in reality, like someone can believe they are going to study, because that's something they have previously done. Someone can also believe they are going to go on holiday, because they have already booked and paid for it.

So once again, there are in fact "beliefs" that correspond with reality. Another instance would be when an individual believes their favourite sports team will win, on the basis that they're have built up a successful track record.

Belief= something that has happened and will happen=reality.

Pro states that maths itself is not true due to numbers being from the imagination, however, this contradicts his previous statement that the number 1=matter=true.

Then he argues that number come from "our minds", but this still doesn't show them to be not part of reality. Here's why:

Our minds=reality.

Our minds are actually part of the reality. The world and things as we know them cannot exist without our minds.

Human mind=the ability to create. The ability to create is what shapes our reality.

Thus making it real.

Reality=our minds and how we perceive things.

Our minds and how we perceive things=reality.

Now back to you Pro.
Debate Round No. 2


only now is real

false=anywhere beyond my personal physical experience of now, as i dont know

facts are past observations, knowledge, and no knowledge exist of beliefs, like i cant remember what your belief looks like.. its not a thing i can see and touch, and whatever i imagine, is not what you imagine even thou it might seem similair in how we agree about an imaginary idea

kNow=now, not future and past



life is, not was or will be... life is true, life is matter, matter is only now

to counter your number argument, i can create a superman in my mind and "put" him in an animated movie, but you wouldnt say that he exist in reality would you? beyond being light on your screen

mind=my end=future and past

life=my beginning=now

so my mind is anywhere beyond now

creation and destruction is impossible in reality, matter can at best transform. make the matter that i an apple, nothing, i dare you

only physical experiecne is real. thoughts are not real and dosnt exist in reality, but they do exist to my experience




Pro argues that "only now is real", but obviously both the past is actually real too. To expound on this a little further, me going on holiday to Portugal at the age of 15 was a real event because I visited and experienced it--as well as having witness testimony for that. You can also use the example of historical events like WW1 and WW2, which were real and genuinely took place.

Real=events that have happened and are happening. Therefore, both the past and present, and to a large extent the future, are real. Because they are not necessarily happening in our imaginations but in reality.


Real=past and present



Matter=past and present

Regarding Pros counter-argument that he could create a superman [in his mind] and put him in an animated movie, there is nothing to say that *some* people wouldn't in fact interpret him as real. Someone who feels inspired by the superman could dress up as him, and then basically become him--thus meaning that the superman becomes real.

Someone dressing as up as the superman=the superman becoming real

The superman becoming real+the person thinking they're the superman=real superman

Thus, a superman exists.

Alluding to Pros resolution that "imagination is the opposite of reality", once again this isn't always the case. Largely because people actually make a reality from their minds and imagination. Take ambition for an example:

Person wants to be businessman=person becomes businessman

Which thus means that being a businessman becomes a reality.

Debate Round No. 3


was real isnt real, like will be

now=reality loop 1 second or less


now=physical experience

past=memory of physical experience

if you describe what happend 10 seconds ago, are you decribing reality? or a memory

future is ahead of now

i can believe 2+2 equals 5 all day long, but i will never experience it in reality.

you can believe superman on the screen is real like you can believe the moon is made of cheese

impossible is possible by belief, and possibilities are imaginary

so, if i believe i am god, i can create things in reality? like i can put a million dollors besides you right now? basicly you can do it to if what you argue is true

belief IS false, possibiltiies has 2 sides, either i am wearing a hat or not, but your belief in my claim that i am wearing it dosnt make it so, i can lie

there is no life, in my imaginaiton, imagination is a dead nation. im a gi nation

if you become a buisness man you know you did it, if you think about becomming it now maybe you will know you cant be, thus belief is irrelveant

even thou you imagine becomming a buisness man.. or women.. you can imagine it all you like, but even if you become it.. you will never come out of your imagiation..

if i want to build a dream house, and i have the perfect image in my mind of it, i build it and its done it looks 100 percent alike but, is the house infront of me, the same house as i have in my mind?

if you can create things in reality from your mind, you are god in reality, why believe in a religion then?


Real is in fact real as it will be, if something is going to be real--it will transform into just that.

Now=reality+future=reality+future is reality

Pro more or less admits that the past is a part of reality, at least considering his definition of "now" which is "physical experience" and "past" which is "memory of physical experience".

Pro isn't arguing that memory of physical experience is not reality. Primarily because it obviously is reality.


You could even argue that the past makes the present reality, obviously without the past we would not have reality as it actually is.

Past=makes reality=therefore is reality.

Once again, even the future is a part of reality as it is not a dream in itself. As explained in round three--someone can have a ambition to become a businessman [or indeed anything] and then they can be that in the future. Thus, it is not a part of their imagination and becomes a reality.

Now, if we describe what happened 10 seconds ago [as Pro argues] we are without doubt describing reality. One could have given oral sex to their partner 10 seconds ago; and it is a reality.

Additionally, you could have cooked some food; and it is still a reality. Me picking an orange in my garden 10 seconds ago is also a reality, because I now have the orange in my hand.

Orange in my hand=me having picked it.

Me having picked the orange=reality.

Without the orange, reality would simply not exist.

The orange=an object belonging to reality.

Anything that has happened 10 seconds ago is a reality.

Once more, 2+3 oranges=5 oranges.

These 5 oranges=reality.

Pro somewhat contradicts their argument by re-introducing the 2+2+5 argument as he argued in round two that were numbers were a product of the imagination and not part of reality anyway.

Naturally, numbers are part of reality.

Now relating to the superman argument, I didn't exactly say that he *only* becomes real by appearing on screen. My argument was that he can become reality by someone being inspired by him in the film and then becoming him. By purchasing a superman outfit, cultivating some skills, and practising their superman status, they CAN become the superman.

Possible is impossible by belief, and impossibilities are imaginary.

Moreover, if Pro believed he was G-d or a god he maybe could create things in reality, He could potentially create a godly meal, or he could create a godly house for himself. He could surely build on his abilities and maybe even convince some people into thinking that he is god, thus making it a reality for them.

And who is anyone who argue with this reality?


Opinion=reality+Harry Potter=British film=reality.

The Harry Potter film in fact took place in reality.

Most importantly, "imagination is not a dead nation" as Pro argues. The imagination is simply part of an individuals mind, which is thus a part of reality. The mind of a person creates reality.

A person wants to build a castle=person builds a castle.

The person only built the castle in the first place because the dreamed it in their mind, I.E imagination, and then it became an ambition of theirs.


The ambition derives

from the imagination.

Concerning Pros point about building a house and it being the same as the one he envisions in his mind. If he has made the house how he's thought he would make it and based it on the image in his mind, then it certainly would be the same house. It would only be a different house if he didn't use the image in his mind to create it and thus made it into a different and contrary house.

One could argue that religion is based on people creating things in reality from their mind.

A person thinks about G-d=person writes passages relating to the G-d=person becomes a prophet=person's writings gain followers=the G-d becomes real.

Therefore, we have a deity that people entirely believe in and consider real. The G-d is not imaginary, but a real being.
Debate Round No. 4


facts are in the past, past dosnt matter, now is matter, i know my experience of now

you dont know what will be, future is imaginary

memory is not real, now is real

reality dosnt exist inside my mind, reality is physical not mental

you can argue anything, but how do you know..

if i flip over a glass and water runs out on my table, the glass standing on the table before i flipped it is in my mind, not real

imaginaiton is future, future is ahead of now. to say 5 seconds ahead of now is real, is to say reality is 5 seconds ahead of reality, you reading these words is not 5 seconds ahead of now. whenever you read these words on the screen, its now


future and past dosnt exist in reality, they are false and truth, opposite of matter

if you did something 10 seconds ago, you are not doing it, thus it isnt real

i could put an orange in your hand

if it has happend, it isnt happening, thus its not real

math is useless without being attached to something, 1 ocean, 1 rock, big difference, whatever you have in your hand is at least 1. im not talking about the number.. the number simply describes it.. this should be easy to understand

numbers are not natural, and not a part of reality beyond the symbols i can write down

only now is nature, past is machine and future is unicorns..

superman is defined by exceeding man.. you can not just imagine having these powers and it come real, not sure i understand what you mean

lying to people and making them believe things makes no things real.. creation is impossible in reality

i know the light on my screen and the sounds i hear when i watch a movie, thats it, i have to imagine the rest of it. seeing a movie is like being inside the head of a person, watching stories in its mind

imaginaiton guides my actions.. i cant move without my imagination.. but imaginiaton can never be real, simply imagine a supernatural thing and make it real to prove your case

ambition dosnt create reality.. a building is a construction

machine=match IN energy=knowledge

if i stand there.. looking at the house i build.. i can touch with my hands... i can not do that with the house in my mind, why would i even build it i alredy have it in my mind and therfore real?

matter can at best transform, make an apple nothing

belief dosnt make anything real.. never did, religion is false by default, unknown

i am not a unicorn, but you can believe in me



Pro further argues that "facts are in the past", and that "the past doesn't matter", however the past does in fact matter a lot. This is fundamentally because the past makes the present, and is thus matter.

To an extent we do know what will be, for example a person who has paid for some new lip gloss knows that they will use that lip gloss and wear it. And say if two people are about to make love, you *know* there will physical intimacy before them. Knowing certain things about the future isn't necessarily predicting exactly what the whole future is, it's merely about making rational and experience-based conclusions about it.

The memory is what retains information about the past and present, so the memory is of course real.

Memory=collection of different events and happenings in our lives and/or the world around us.

Events and happenings in our lives and the world around us=real.

Therefore, the only outcome we come to is that memory is real and is simply a collection of facts and experience.

Facts and experience=real.

Real=facts and experience.

These mathematical findings tell us precisely what the answer is.

Arguing anything=knowing something.

Anyone who is arguing a subject matter knows at least something about it.

Knowing something=real.

Real is having knowledge, no matter how small or large.

If I flip over a table and a glass of water runs out, the table standing on the glass before I flipped it is not in my mind. It is there and is a definite part of reality.

Future=what will be in reality.

What will be in reality=future.

So there we go, future and reality are two of the same things.

Since reading Pros sentence about five seconds being ahead and thus future not being a part of reality, five seconds have in fact gone meaning that the five seconds Pro referred to are NOW a part of reality. Since writing this sentence, another five seconds have gone and are now connected to the reality of the past.

To put it simply:

The past is the present.

The present is the future.

The future is now.

So unlike Pro argues, the past and future definitely *do* exist in reality.

It's because did something ten minutes ago that it's a part of reality.

Reality is:

Brushing my hair, that is what I did ten minutes ago, that is part of reality. All three tenses are reality. Reality is brushing my hair.

Approximately 15 minutes ago I got naked and massaged body lotion all over myself. That is reality, because that happened in reality.

Getting naked and rubbing body lotion on oneself=a happening in reality=a happening in reality=reality.

So, the past is in fact reality.

Previously I also included a holiday I went on in Portugal, another thing that took place in reality.

Going on holiday to Portugal=an actual real holiday experience=an actual real holiday experience=reality.

Just because something has been in the past, it does not mean it's not a part of reality--once again, the past makes reality.

If Pro puts an orange in my hand, the orange is in my hand.

Orange in hand=reality.

Then=me licking and sucking the juice out of the orange.

Which thus=an eaten orange.

An eaten orange=reality.

Reality=an eaten orange.

Now I'm sure most people would adhere to the fact that maths has to be attached to something, which I have done throughout my whole argument.

However at the same time the number still has its own significance. For example, having one rock in comparison to one hundred rocks is obviously different.


Now does not=unicorns.

Unicorns can exist in the past, present and present. There are simply no boundaries on as to when the unicorns can exist.




So once again, we're left with the same scientific answers.

Essentially, lying to people can definitely make them real--maybe not according to the opinion of Pro, but this most certainly happen for others.

For example:

There's someone who states that they're an alien, that person buys an alien costume and has an alien make-over, thus other people believe they're an alien.

Therefore, them being an alien becomes a part of a reality.

Alien=reality. Regarding witness testimony, there's a small child that I know that my father always refers to as an "baby alien"...again suggesting than aliens exist.

Aliens existing=reality.

A person who believes that someone/something is an alien, is making that concept are part of their reality.

Now onto seeing a movie, seeing a movie is again part of reality. The characters and stories in it may not be "real", however the fact the movie was created and is then being watched by other people and me makes it a part of reality.

This movie would have also been the result of someone's imagination, thus showing that our minds predominantly dictate to what reality is.

If imagination guides ones actions [which is what Pro states] then it is still part of reality.


Peoples actions establish what their reality will be.

And where do people's actions come from?

Obviously their mind.

So ambition can in fact make reality, if someone is ambitious enough to make their ambitions happening, their ambitions thus become a part of reality and transform into actions.

Someone has an ambition to become buy a BMW, they put the effort in and then buy the BMW.

Someone has an ambition to improve their language skills, they then practice and improve their language skills.

Improved language skills of course only=reality.

Me believing that Pro is a unicorn could well mean that he is a unicorn; at least according to the minds of other people. This is what determines what reality is.

The house that Pro has built directly comes from the house he had in his mind, though he may not be able to touch both they are still intrinsically connected. The house that he's built would not exist without the house that he created in his mind. That is the house that has led him to this house.

The house in his mind=this house.

This house=reality.

Reality=this house.

An apple can only really become nothing if you somehow destroy it. Even so though:

An apple=reality.

Even if the apple is no longer there or is now not the apple it used to be, it is still part of reality.

It's been a pleasure arguing with Pro again and I'd like to thank him for this thoroughly fascinating debate, in which I have truly expanded my intellectual horizons.

Debate Round No. 5
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
thanks :D
Posted by Emilrose 1 year ago
great job v_spex ;D
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
what im getting at with 0 and 1 is you cant have something in your hand, that is 0, it is at least 1
Posted by Emilrose 1 year ago
Great! xD
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
sure :b
Posted by Emilrose 1 year ago
Can I accept? ;D
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
impossible is possible by belief
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
any false answer is imaginary

if i take a rock in my hand, and i take 1 more rock in it, i have 2 rocks in my hand, and i have to imagine a third
Posted by Emilrose 1 year ago
Hmm, thinking about it..
Posted by mfigurski80 1 year ago
Don't get it. It really matters what you believe: Imagination could be the only real reality.

Anyway, could you explain your thought process in the comments?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had terrible punctuation, along with spelling and grammar mistakes every round, and almost every sentence. Whereas Con didn't have nearly as many, therefore the S&G point goes to Con.