The Instigator
Romanii
Pro (for)
The Contender
Forever23
Con (against)

Free Will exists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Forever23 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: Select Winner
Started: 7/31/2017 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 1,819 times Debate No: 103349
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (19)
Votes (0)

 

Romanii

Pro

"Free Will" is defined as "the capacity to exert conscious control over one's own actions."

Hopefully, that will be enough to avoid having the debate devolve into semantics.

First round for acceptance.
Debate Round No. 1
Romanii

Pro

FRAMEWORK: Every reasonable epistemic framework presumes some basic level of trust in our sensory faculties. Without that trust, we're left with epistemic nihilism -- most if not all knowledge is founded upon our perceptual experience of reality. Unless there's definitive evidence overriding the validity of our perceptions, we have no choice but to assume that those perceptions are accurate reflections of reality.

== Free Will ==

We're all constantly experiencing the existence of our own free will. At this very moment, you can freely, consciously, and intentionally *choose* to avert your eyes away from the screen. Or you can choose to keep reading instead. Con's advocacy claims that no matter what you choose, it was all pre-determined by the mechanistic forces of the universe, and the mental experience you *literally just had* of making the choice was 100% illusory.

But of course, that's nonsensical. Think about every decision you've ever made. You *know* that you made those decisions. You distinctly remember making them. It's something you've done over and over and over again throughout the course of your life. Upon examining the totality of one's perceptual experience, it becomes overwhelmingly self-evident that free will exists. Con needs to come up with some incredibly convincing evidence to refute that perception. Until she does, we should be fully confident in the existence of free will.

I have the entirety of human experience on my side. It's Con's job to show why we should dismiss it all as an illusion.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 11 through 19 records.
Posted by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
Forever, do not C/P Wylted's arguments. I have a problem with that, even if Romanii doesn't. Forever needs to advance (or not) in the tournament on her own merits, not Wylted's.
Posted by Romanii 3 years ago
Romanii
For the record, I have no issue whatsoever with Forever c/p-ing Wylted's arguments. If she chooses to do so, the voters should evaluate them as if they're her own.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Look at Romani trying to have a freewill debate without semantics. LOL
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Pro is wrong. I will PM you your arguments forever. You're welcome. Just copy and paste what I say directly into the debate please.
Posted by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
Sweetness.
Posted by Romanii 3 years ago
Romanii
Yessir
Posted by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
This is your tournament debate, correct?
Posted by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
This is your tournament debate, correct?
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
backwardseden
If you believe in the god according to the bible free will does not exist.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.