The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Zarroette
Con (against)
Winning
27 Points

religion=to rely on

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 6 votes the winner is...
Zarroette
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/8/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,502 times Debate No: 67998
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (30)
Votes (6)

 

vi_spex

Pro

belief/religion=positive or negative position on an imaginary claim

am i holding a rock in my hand as i type this? you have to imagine it
Zarroette

Con

Thank you, Vi_spex, for instigating this debate.

My counter-argument is short, but I am the one who is sweet.

Negative Case

Religion is a noun [1]. “Rely on” is a verb [2]. Therefore, my opponent’s claim of “religion=to rely on” cannot hold true because the terms involved are not of the same type.

You cannot ‘religion’, nor is that a ‘rely on’ over there.

References

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...

[2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

know=Matter=true=now=physical experience=transformation

if they can not exist without each other they are the same

how can you be in a religion without having to rely on?
Zarroette

Con

Thank you, vi_spex.


Negative Case

Please extend this argument.


Rebuttals



"know=Matter=true=now=physical experience=transformation"

This is not relevant to "religion=to rely on".



"if they can not exist without each other they are the same"

Just because things are dependent on each other, it does not mean that they are the same. My opponent has the burden of proof to show that what he wrote is the case.



"how can you be in a religion without having to rely on?"

There is a difference between "be[ing] in a religion" and religion itself. The resolution specifies "religion", not being in a religion. Hence, my opponent's argument here does not fit the resolution.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

religion cant exist without anyone being in a religion

am i holding a rock in my hand as i type this?
Zarroette

Con

Thank you, vi_spex.

I do not think that my opponent's responses are relevant to this debate. Ultimately, the voters will be left to decide whether my judgement is correct.

Extend the rest of my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
Zarroette

Con

My opponent seems to agree with me. I take this as some form of concession. If it is not, then my opponent still has a round to explain otherwise.

Until then, extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
vi_spex

Pro

you are such a tough opponenet
Zarroette

Con

At least we agree on something ;)
Debate Round No. 5
30 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
thats what determines the shape of my body
Posted by ATRUE-ISRAELITE 2 years ago
ATRUE-ISRAELITE
And I'm Hebrew, what is your point?
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
2 bunnies run, 1 gets killed 1 survive
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
if all tall Guys die, short Guys live on, evolution
Posted by ATRUE-ISRAELITE 2 years ago
ATRUE-ISRAELITE
So you say the environment shaped your body; what exactly in the environment shaped your body? As far as I know, the environment is where we live and it is not a breathing or living thing.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
im just talking about the form it has.. i agree the fish is the form
Posted by Envisage 2 years ago
Envisage
...
Nac
Posted by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
The fish never existed in that form. The fish is the form. Fish=form. You say that I cannot know this? Not knowing=knowing form. In not knowing, the form is known. If the form isn't known, then I know. Knowing is without form. Without form=without fish. Now I'm hungry.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
unless the fish existed in that form forever, then others didnt need to die off so it can get to that form
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
the environment shapes my body, like the fish with a light on its head, which it uses as bait in the dark deep Water, there must have been others of its kind but different, that has died of till it reached the stage its at

invironmental pressure, imagine 2 bears, polar bears, one with shorter fur than the other, the one with thick fur has greator chance of surviving if the one with the short fur hasn't got thick enough fur to survive, so the one with thick fur survives and new ones with thick fur can live on if it get babies, random. like, the bear with thick fur has greater chances of surviving because of the logic that is the bears fur is better fit to survive the cold, and its all random, randomness+logic=chaos(all natural change including evolution)
the bear that has the thick fur, is naturally the one that survives, because of logic, and its random because why didn't the other bear have the same fur, but now it dosnt matter because the one with short fur isn't around, perfekt balance
same with a bear with to thick for, if its to thick it wont survive and wont breed, random, no choise involved

same with a bear with to thick for, if its to thick it wont survive and wont breed, random, no choise involved

life is natural, not mechanical, machines can not give birth. machine and supernature comes from nature, superNATURE is in contrast with nature, like superman and man, where as machine is mostly a copy of nature like a camera is a mechanical copy of an eye
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
vi_spexZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Tie. Both had adequate conduct throughout. S&G - Con. Pro failed to practice proper capitalization and punctuation, whereas Con made no such errors. Arguments - Con. Pro failed to present a coherent case, further Con was able to rebut each point (?) raised by Pro while having her own case remain unchallenged for the entire debate. Due to Pro's failure to counter Con's arguments, as well as having his own defeated soundly, Con wins arguments. Sources - Tie. While Con did utilize sources in R1, they were for clarification purposes rather than given to strengthen a particular argument. This is a clear win for Con.
Vote Placed by Tweka 2 years ago
Tweka
vi_spexZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro Concedes
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
vi_spexZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded in round three.
Vote Placed by Envisage 2 years ago
Envisage
vi_spexZarroetteTied
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: Zarroette should be indicted for GBH
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
vi_spexZarroetteTied
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: Concession..
Vote Placed by BLAHthedebator 2 years ago
BLAHthedebator
vi_spexZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Gracious, but quite funny, concession by pro.