The Instigator
Letera
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Con (against)
Winning
43 Points

prove

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  
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: 4/21/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,698 times Debate No: 11825
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (14)
Votes (10)

 

Letera

Pro

you cant prove with 100 percent certainty that I am not a monkey
Danielle

Con

You can not prove with 100 percent certainty that I can not prove with 100% certainty that you are not a monkey.
Debate Round No. 1
Letera

Pro

My opponent has failed to provide an argument for me to refute. My opponent has not taken this debate seriously and thus I urge a strong pro vote.
Danielle

Con

The resolution to this debate is simply the word "prove." The word prove is defined as to establish the truth or genuineness of, as by evidence or argument [1]. Therefore, in order to win this debate, I must prove more things than my opponent does.

In R1, my opponent made the statement, "You cant prove with 100 percent certainty that I am not a monkey." This is true, therefore she has proven one thing. In my response, I wrote, "You can not prove with 100 percent certainty that I can not prove with 100% certainty that you are not a monkey." This is also true. Therefore, I have also proven one thing.

In R2, Pro writes that I have failed to provide an argument for her to refute. However, she has not proven that this is true. I can prove that it's not true by noting I did indeed make a statement in the previous round, and in order to refute that statement she would have to prove it untrue. Therefore, since she could have proven my contention wrong, I did indeed provide an argument. Thus, Pro's assertion that I did not provide an argument is false; she has not (can not) prove it.

Next, Pro says that I have not taken this debate seriously. You'll notice that Pro did not (can not) prove that either. However, I can contend that argument (disprove - or at least show genuinely, as the definition implies) that I have in fact taken this debate seriously. My evidence is the fact that I have taken a decent amount of time to respond to my opponent; in fact more time than she has afforded me. I am also making cohesive, legitimate and structured arguments and have/will present them in a timely manner. So in short, I have given evidence that I have taken this debate seriously while my opponent has not proven that I do not take this debate seriously.

In conclusion, I have proven a total of 3 things: my statement in R1, and I have also proven that Pro's two contentions are untrue and/or weak. Pro has still only proven one thing. So I have proven 3; Pro has proven 1. By that measure, I'd say that this debate is currently strongly in my favor. I have out-proven Pro, and the resolution merely reads "prove." I have also used better spelling and grammar than my opponent, and actually provided a source whereas Pro has not. Finally, by debate standards you can't introduce new arguments in R3 (or it's considered bad conduct) so by that measure, if Pro were to comply with debate etiquette, she would not even be able to make a new argument in R3 meaning I don't have much to refute.

... And on that note, I have just proven (given a substantial amount of evidence) that I am more likely to win this debate than Pro, so I have actually proven 4 things, and Pro still has proven just one ( - and technically she didn't prove that statement; she just made a true statement).

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...
Debate Round No. 2
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
"monkey randomly typing on key board will never write hamlet."

Marauder, *smacks forehead with palm* I thought it was a monkey that originally wrote Hamlet. ; ) A foolish fellow who has somehow become legendary in the literary world...
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
Also, once again, if mongeese had actually read my round he would have seen that I thought there was a 3rd round. I didn't introduce new arguments on purpose.
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
Mongeese -- Pro's sentence was true, but Pro did not prove anything. All she did was make a statement. She did not prove it. RFD fail (shocker).
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
Phil - to be honest, that's actually bad conduct. You're not supposed to produce new arguments in the last round (though in this debate, Pro did it too)... But in my defense, I thought there were 3 rounds in this debate and not 2, which is why I introduced new arguments. I didn't mean to lol. But if you read my last few sentences, I was like, "In the next round..." blah blah bc I didn't know the debate was ending.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
RFD:
Conduct: PRO. CON made a new, last-round argument, even defining new words and proposing a new interpretation of the resolution, both of which should have been handled in Round 1.
Spelling/Grammar: CON. Should be obvious.
Arguments: PRO. By proving lots of things, CON pretty much affirmed the resolution "Prove." However, not all titles are resolutions in debating; if we use the Instigator's first sentence as the resolution, CON admitted that the sentence was true.
Posted by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
Thats why I love being con. Coax them into a short response, then nail them with a long explainative attack in the last round confirming you a win. Cheap, but good tactic.
Posted by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
lol
Posted by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
epic win
Posted by Marauder 7 years ago
Marauder
If you hand me the finished typed hamlet book, It would be far for rational for me to believe you typed it or that you at bear minimum trained you monkey to type than it would be to believe that monkey typed it randomly.
Posted by Spaztoid 7 years ago
Spaztoid
Ah, a monkey could indeed type hamlet. However improbable it may be, there is a chance that it could happen.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by lindseyloo92 7 years ago
lindseyloo92
LeteraDanielleTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by sidobagga 7 years ago
sidobagga
LeteraDanielleTied
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 Kahvan 7 years ago
Kahvan
LeteraDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:22 
Vote Placed by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
LeteraDanielleTied
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:41 
Vote Placed by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
LeteraDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by Vigrant 7 years ago
Vigrant
LeteraDanielleTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
LeteraDanielleTied
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 Marauder 7 years ago
Marauder
LeteraDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 studentathletechristian8 7 years ago
studentathletechristian8
LeteraDanielleTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
LeteraDanielleTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06