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

know=physical experience=absolute

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/30/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 557 times Debate No: 79182
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)




my shoe=black and white
the castle i see=larger then the house besides it
2 stones in my hand and 2 more stonse in my hand=4 stones in my hand
the soda can in my hand=unzipped by me, just opened it


Know is a verb (or very rarely a noun) while physical is an adjective.

One can know something or be 'in the know' as in the inner circle of a larger group. Something can be physical but you cannot 'physical' something and also you cannot be 'in the physical'. On top of this, you cannot be 'know' as you can be 'physical' since know is not an adjective just as much as physical is neither a verb nor a noun.

Experience is either a noun or a verb, much like 'know' is and absolute is a verb, just as 'physical' is.

If anything this resolution should be know=experience and physical=absolute since that could grammatically work.

You can have an experience and experience something. You can have something that is absolute but cannot use either term in the same way as the other.

Both equations have the same grammatical disparity within themselves and both are negated along the same logic.

Furthermore, to 'know' something is mental by definition and thus is not physical. Experiences are no absolute because they end up being memories which are subjectively remembered from that person's point of view and influenced by emotions along with other factors.
Debate Round No. 1


know is physical for me to know anything

those words are spelled differently

something is physical, not mental


There is absolutely no need for knowledge to be physical in order for Pro to know anything. What exactly is the point he is making because right now it seems like gibberish to me.
Debate Round No. 2


knowledge is not physical, know is physical, how do you respond to this message if you dont know it


Pro has failed to uphold the entire second half of the resolution. The last mention of experience=absolute was in the resolution itself and has never been addressed by Pro the entire debate thus far.

As for this know=physical nonsense, Pro thinks because you know something that all 'things' are physical and that therefore to know is to physical something but that makes absolutely no sense both grammatically and logically.
Debate Round No. 3


you havnt adressed my arguments from round 1, you are con if you want to try to win

sense=physical experience

how does a blind man know what is on a picture i am showing him?


Sense=physical but know=/=sense

You are trying to merge things which can only be mixed or linked but never equation.
Debate Round No. 4


how do you know what is on a picture i am showing you without sight? and how can you have sight without eyes?


like, 1+1+3=4+1=6-1=1+2+2=5


Stop inventing new equations to justify your old ones. It makes you look more stupid, not less.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
>Reported vote: Sarra// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: conduct - R5 "stupid"; S&G - R1 "difficult to read"; Con somewhat accepts Pro argument in R1 "Know is a verb (or very rarely a noun)"

[*Reason for removal*] This vote is very confusing. While I can understand the conduct point to a degree, I can't see where the S&G point is coming from, or specifically how Con's first round is difficult to read. I'm also having trouble understanding how Con conceded the debate with that statement, since it's entirely unclear how that proves the also confusing resolution true.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
you just got deleted from the face of the earth.. who looks stupid lol
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by roguetech 2 years ago
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:14 
Reasons for voting decision: Gave Pro conduct, due to the parting shot "It makes you look more stupid, not less." Certainly understandable, but... hopefully so is giving them that point. Pro clearly completely looses at grammar. They could debate a wall and loose for grammar. No sources. I'm not sure it would be fair to even imply that Pro made arguments, let alone convincing.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years 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 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: vi_spex, lol :P. He has the BOP but didn't maintain it. At the end he has a string of random numbers together that has no bearing on the debate. Con offered some substantive arguments in R1 that were never adequately responded to, so he wins.