The Instigator
Smithereens
Pro (for)
The Contender
Challenge Expired
Open Debate

Solipsism is false

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  
Debate Challenge Expired
Nobody accepted the challenge for this debate. If you are Smithereens, login to see your options.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/13/2018 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Challenge Declined
Viewed: 649 times Debate No: 110635
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)

 

Smithereens

Pro

Definitions

Solipsism - Only the mind of one's self exists.

In this debate I will argue against hard solipsism, which is different to philosophical solipsism in that normally solipsism makes the purely epistemological claim that only the mind of one's self can be known to exist. I've defined solipsism as the extention of that claim commonly used, where only the mind of one's self exists to begin with. Con will argue that solipsism is true.

Format

Asian Parliamentary style: Affirmative case begins, Negative opens with rebuttal then positive material, Affirmative rebuts and presents more arguments, negative rebuts and presents further arguments, Affirmative rebuts and summarises, Negative rebuts and summarises. Rebuttals come before material.

Voting

Sources (2 points) is being substituted for a custom criteria, 'Method.' Award these two points to the debater who had better responsiveness to opponent's arguments. Good method involves accurately dissecting the opponent's material without ignoring important points and refuting the core argument and not just quotes from the opponent's text.

Rules

Standard Etiquette applies.
Deviation from the debate format will result in Method penalty (2 points)
By accepting the debate you accept all stated specifications made here.
Do not accept the debate, express interest in the comments.



This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
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
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Smooosh 3 years ago
Smooosh
Not for nothing, but the type of solipsism your arguing against was probably created by somebody who hated thw idea of solipsism, but couldn't discredit it philosophically, so he/she distorted what solipsism really is and twisted it in a way so they could discredit it.
Posted by Smithereens 3 years ago
Smithereens
@Smoosh Read the introduction
Posted by Smooosh 3 years ago
Smooosh
Your definition of solipsism is slightly off. https://www.google.com.... If you went with the definition as it is stated and didn't leave out the "all that can be known to" part of it, I'd accept this debate and beat you!
Posted by Smooosh 3 years ago
Smooosh
Do you mean pink elephants with nine legs?
Posted by canis 3 years ago
canis
it is as true as it can be on a non- metaphysical "level"..On a metaph-level it is as true as pink elephants.
Posted by Smithereens 3 years ago
Smithereens
The formal definition of it is. It's common usage is not.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
I thought solipsism was a skeptical claim Generally thinking? I don"t think any hard solipsists exist, just skeptical ones.
Posted by ThatAustrianDude 3 years ago
ThatAustrianDude
Oh, wait. I think I understand. Contender begins debating from the start (round 1). Anyway, I would gladly accept the debate. Also, seeing that you are a pretty formidable opponent, I would be pleased taking on a challenge as a beginner on this platform. :)
Posted by ThatAustrianDude 3 years ago
ThatAustrianDude
I would like to accept this debate. However, just to clarify. Round 2 begins with the rebuttals and supporting arguments from the contender, right? Or does it begin with ONLY rebuttals in round 2, and round 3 would need to include "positive materials".

I am just not very clear on the instructions.
Posted by rocinante 3 years ago
rocinante
I'd take up your challenge if solipsism weren't so easy to discredit. Solipsism is a philosophical dead-end. I'll reserve my arrows in order to let the debate unfold, which would be difficult if solipsism were plausible [the problem of inter-subjectivity].
This debate has 8 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.