All Big Issues
The Instigator
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

# God Is Existent

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 5/23/2015 Category: Philosophy Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 2,236 times Debate No: 75680
Debate Rounds (4)

30 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by tejretics 3 years ago
@Ragnar: both sets of text were C/P'd by @lannan from a debate of mine.

"1. Premise A: Every cause was either caused or uncaused (Null Hypothesis)

2. Premise B: There is a finite number of past causes.

3. Let n be the number of past causes and let C be the set of all causes that ever existed: c1, c2, c3 ... cn

4. Now choose any cause cx from the set of causes C.

Using Recursive process

5. Does cause cx have at least one preceding cause causing it?

6. If the answer is no, then cx is an uncaused cause. End of proof

7. If the answer is yes, then cx has at least one preceding cause causing it

8. Let cy be any of the causes that caused cx

9. Remove cx from the set of all causes C. Now the size of C will be reduced by 1

10. Now make cx = cy and repeat steps 5 to 10

The recursive process will loop until either:

a. An uncaused cause is found in step 5; or

b. After a maximum of n-1 iterations, the size of set C will become 1. At that point, there's only one cause left in the set. There are absolutely no other causes available that can cause it. Therefore, this single cause must be an uncaused cause. End of proof."

And Lannan's response to Occam's razor--I think R3.

Both from: http://www.debate.org...

Well, technically from his team debate Google Doc, but still .... completely C/P'd ...
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Regarding the plagiarism accusation, which sets of text are copy/pasted from elsewhere?
Posted by Preston 3 years ago
@Blue Steele I used every char and had to edit my rebuttal to even fit into the allotted chars
(1) Sources. Failure to explain why Pro's sources were better. "Carried through more" is not a valid reason to conclude the sources were more reliable.
- I explained I'm voting off what stands in the final round, what stood and was refuted stood in favor of Pro, I felt his sources didnt fit and stated so.

(2) Arguments. Too generic. This RFD really says nothing specific about how it reached its conclusion. It just asserts certain points were rebutted.
-" I feel KCA was not properly refuted, your sources [4,5] didnt address his actual argumentation but instead you asserted your view of why he was incorrect in your final speech and i will not accept new evidence, and the evidence provided didnt disprove anything provided by pro. I feel con did not relate his points to his opponents to show that pro had no case, And Con do not accuse of plagiarism, if you google Occam's Razor, the majority of sources have been used in debates. If you had cross applied contentions you would win"
This means i felt he did not accurately cross apply points to refute AFF, I also felt KCA wasn't refuted correctly or completely

OOC: I feel you have abused your moderator abilities, you simply went down my voted on section and removed my last 3 giving you viable reason for mod punishment, I find this unacceptable and disappointing. If you disagree with my vote then vote yourself.
Posted by bluesteel 3 years ago
==================================================================
>Reported vote: Preston // Moderator action: Removed<

5 points to Pro (arguments, sources). Reasons for voting decision: I found Pro's Sources to be carried through better and more thoroughly, thus award Pro with sources. Con i disagree with your Round 3 observation on Ontological Arguments, I feel that his R2 was a proper Rebut and thus not dropped as you claim, He also rebutted all main subjects of debate. I feel he developed the arguement while you focused on the fact he dropped an initial part of it, But this isnt what i voted on anyways because he as aff need only prove the Res. I feel KCA was not properly refuted, your sources [4,5] didnt address his actual argumentation but instead you asserted your view of why he was incorrect in your final speech and i will not accept new evidence, and the evidence provided didnt disprove anything provided by pro. I feel con did not relate his points to his opponents to show that pro had no case, And Con do not accuse of plagiarism, if you google Occam's Razor, the majority of sources have been used in debates. If you had cross applied contentions you would win

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Sources. Failure to explain why Pro's sources were better. "Carried through more" is not a valid reason to conclude the sources were more reliable. (2) Arguments. Too generic. This RFD really says nothing specific about how it reached its conclusion. It just asserts certain points were rebutted.
=================================================================
Posted by bluesteel 3 years ago
=================================================================
>Reported vote: michigainman56 // Moderator action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Iannan had the better reasoning as well as sources.

[*Reason for removal*] Vote bomb. Failure to explain S&G and conduct. Far too generic on arguments/sources. RFD says nothing of substance.
===============================================================
Posted by lannan13 3 years ago
Well I was given specific permission to just go ahead and use it, and if Con wants to argue that then he should argue why under half of his arguments from his constructives are unique.
Posted by Preston 3 years ago
Well I find arguing plagiarism is a weak attempt at nullifying an argument, especially since everything is used at some point in time on this site.
Posted by lannan13 3 years ago
That was not plagerism as I was given permission to use that from here. https://docs.google.com...

Besides if we plug your R2 case into the plagerism checker only 42% of it is unique. So that's a side bit.
Posted by lannan13 3 years ago
Michiganman has been reported for vote bombing.
Posted by Preston 3 years ago
michigainman56 please remove vote, you didnt explain why he should recieve every point
1 votes has been placed for this debate.