The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Max.Wallace
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

"unlimited paradox" - an ever present unlimited force does not exist

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...
dairygirl4u2c
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/25/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 428 times Debate No: 59513
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

"unlimited paradox" - an ever present unlimited force does not exist

can the unlimited limit itself? if not, it is not unlimited. if so, it is not unlimited.

thus, we can see by probing a few questions about what it means to be unlimited, that it does not really exist, at least in terms of being ever present.
Max.Wallace

Con

An unlimited force does exist, it is called "random chance", kind of like a meteor falling on you, or a plane crashing in your house.

There are no limitations to those possibilities, we take the risk every day we breathe.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

'random chance' as con puts it, is not unlimited. it is based on the laws of nature, which make it work like clockwork. to us, we see randomness, but it is like clockwork. for example, when someone is walking down the street and gets struck by lightning, that was random chance, but it wasn't like it wasn't orchestrated by the laws of nature working like clockwork.... molecules doing what they do to cause the lighning and the person walking.

if random chance was truly unlimited, it'd be such that it could "do anything", which is not the case with random chance. and even if it was able to do anything, it can't surmount the probing questions i gave about limiting itself or not limiting itself, without contradicting itself.
Max.Wallace

Con

Who can prevent random chance? You, me, I doubt it. That is unlimited force, and certainly not human created.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

being able to prevent random chance or not does not show it to be unlimited or not. it is all still guided by the clock work of atoms and design, even if it looks arbitrary or whatever to us. and even if it was arbitary or whatever, it still is not 'unlimited'
Max.Wallace

Con

I do not believe that humans will ever be able to defeat the unlimited force, which I would suggest is random chance, until we all are relegated to The Matrix bubbles where the powers that be, believe we belong, therefore an unlimited force does exist, as long as we are free. It is call Freedom, lady.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Clockwork, the Orange sort, a tool of those that king themselves.
Posted by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
please define unlimited.

I'm not accepting this debate regardless, but if I wanted to....

the number, Pi, has unlimited decimals. Therefore it exists. It is used to find the circumference and diameter and is a number with unlimited/infinite decimals afterwards. They are not limited, as this is the property of a circle.

If you are referring to an unlimited powerful god trying to contradict himself, then please clarify this.

your opening is confusing and could be beaten with semantics and/or lack of definition.
Posted by dairygirl4u2c 2 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
i'm not taking the approach of 'unstoppable v immovable'. i'm taking the approach of the two questions i asked
Posted by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
also please define unlimited....

by what our previous debate, I am assuming you are referring to the "Unstoppable force meets Immovable object" in terms of unlimited?

Would need you to clarify, or simply state "anything that is unlimited applies"
Posted by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
please define "ever present"
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
dairygirl4u2cMax.WallaceTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Force =/= chance