The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points
The Contender
Aerogant
Pro (for)
Losing
2 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 4 votes the winner is...
dairygirl4u2c
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/26/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 325 times Debate No: 59600
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Con

note that i am taking the con position in this debate. i usually take the pro position. i changed my stance and want someone to argue the opposite.

this is what i am negating:

000000000000
"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.
0000000000000

i argue, that the unlimited doesn't exist as we understand it. anything that might be said to be unlimited is limited by the laws of nature, and logic. "unlimited but as otherwise limited by logic". so, the unlimited as it comes to the questions about the unlimited limiting itself doesn't exist..... the best answer to the question is not so much that the unlimited can limit itself, but that the unlimited is limited already.

but, that doesn't leave open the possibility for something to go beyond logic. making a square a circle type situation, or making the mean mean 'fish'. when we approach it from 'super logic' perspective, the unlimited doesn't have to, and wouldn't be expected to make sense. the questions that were asked about limiting it or not have no meaning at that point, to something that is above rational meaning to begin with.
Aerogant

Pro

Life is infinite, and finite, like a blank slate versus a painted over slate. In life, it's infinite when you have never made a choice in your life - so everything is open to your directional influence, while choices lead to segments of reality which support you in some manner, while it does not in another manner. So the best way to live life, is to never define yourself in it - keep living as a mystery, a question, undefined in a Universe that is becoming in the same way as you are. You, this Universe, the bacteria, everything are just as naive - remember that. Remember that life is not a story - life is a story in the making. Who is the piper? The Universe, my friend. The piper has always been the Universe - as it goes along as it does, the notes continue on changing, yet the world keeps on spinning despite that. This Universe is a magnificent specimen.

Most important, you cannot spell organism without orgasm.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Con

con seems to be just basically rambling. i don't know what i'm suppose to respond to exactly.
Aerogant

Pro

How could I possibly be rambling, when I have profoundly suggested for you to see life as a blank slate that is infinitely potent in what could be, than to see life as a picture that is finitely potent in what it can be? A child can be everything - a doctor, cop, fireman, lawyer, so on, cannot be everything.

A blank sheet of paper is open for all artists - a used sheet of paper is open for critics.

Your imagination is infinite - your vision is finite.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Con

jibber jabber
Aerogant

Pro

Con has resorted to a concession - they are here to rationalize, not reason their position. Does this mean they have automatically forfeited? I sure hope not, because I'd hate to win a debate that wasn't genuine and entirely based on someone who rather insult me than consult this argument I proposed.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
Water is like wisdom, shape and consciousness. The sole idea of considering that everything comes from water and returns back to water expresses how the Universe is, indeed, above rational thinking - however, again, it being above our thinking spectrum does not make it infinite; infinite is a term people use when they are hit a wall. It's how the human brain works when it primitively deals with its set backs; it makes everything look smaller compared to it, as to not "threaten" its finite capabilities, as at the same time, the brain wants to grow and expand.

Like a turtle on its back, our minds are naive, yet strive.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
Again... The Universe is infinite only when it hasn't become anything, yet. Like a child is infinite until they become something. As long as you are nothing, the imagination can grant you everything; when you become something, the imagination can only shape around that - so it's best to become everything and nothing, to understand the juxtaposition between holism and nihilism.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
dairygirl4u2cAerogantTied
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: pro didn't quite manage to rebut the argument.
Vote Placed by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
dairygirl4u2cAerogantTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con said it best: "jibber jabber"
Vote Placed by Samreay 2 years ago
Samreay
dairygirl4u2cAerogantTied
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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither side presented strong arguments. Con however was at least on topic, whilst Pro's arguments were so far off the rails I am still trying to figure out exactly what the message trying to be conveyed was. But con, capitalisation and proper sentence structure is not a difficult thing to manage, so S&G to pro.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
dairygirl4u2cAerogantTied
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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: CON. PLEASE USE CAPITALIZATION WHEN APPROPRIATE. Con had an unrefuted argument. Pro had a self-help speech.