The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

no fear

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/23/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 526 times Debate No: 94030
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




no fear=i can believe some evil creature of my mind is out to get me.. and give it a mind based on that expectation..


Schizophrenia is a brain disorder in which patients may see or hear things that aren't real. The creatures aren't real. I suggest you consult a doctor
Debate Round No. 1


You said you believe evil creatures in your mind are out to get you........
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
another imbecile blocked
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
should work against any fear
Posted by brainFreeze 2 years ago
What kind of fear are you focusing on?
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
if con honestly has not gotten over his fear after reading this, i lose
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro advanced the idea that fear does not exist because there may be an evil creature in his mind (I am entirely unsure why fear would not exist if that's the case), whereas con countered with the real possibility of brain disorders such as schizophrenia... Unlike pro's previous attempt at this debate, he allowed for a second round to not automatically drop every claim made by con, but rather actively used the second round to allow those points to stand uncontested by asking for clarification without any rebuttal, which con rightly gave. Con however loses conduct as his R1 seems to be a paraphrased imitation of SaintDismas' recent argument on the same topic against the same opponent.