Instigator / Pro
14
1266
rating
119
debates
15.97%
won
Topic
#27

Nicola Tesla was the smartest person in history

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
15
Better sources
6
10
Better legibility
4
5
Better conduct
1
5

After 5 votes and with 21 points ahead, the winner is...

Thoth
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
35
1530
rating
6
debates
66.67%
won
Description

No information

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

One the one hand, Pro entitled the debate "Nicola Tesla was the smartest person in history" but only put forth an argument regarding the number of inventions Tesla had, but failed to explain the connection between the two. On the other hand, Con does not refute this data, or the implied connection between it and the resolution, and instead focused on the definition of smartness.

Con placed a burden of proof on Pro to demonstrate the resolution, but Pro's first round, in an implicit fashion, did: Tesla was the smartest because of the list of inventions. Given the lack of explicit argument on Pro's part, and lack of explicit rebuttal on Con's, I make this a Tie.

Both sides provided adequate sources in support of their positions. Tie.

I saw no major discrepancies in spelling and grammar between the two opponents. Tie.

Pro's style is needlessly antagonistic. More importantly, Pro forfeited a round of the debate. Conduct goes to Con.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro forfeits in Round 3 after what I assume is it becoming apparent to him that in congratulating Tesla on his objective ingenuity, Pro forgot that there's nothing objective about such a congratulation which Con explains in detail, proving with solid links too.

Linking to a Wikipedia page of Tesla's supposed inventions (some of which were as a result of him, not actually him inventing it) and then linking to Merriam-Webster for a definition is nowhere near to equal to Con's direct sourcing in raising bout scepticism in measuring intelligence itself and then in the proof that Tesla's was never and can never be measured at least by current means.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro forfeited. Additionally, pro refused to provide any evidence that everyone else in history was less smart than Tesla.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Conduct goes to con because of the forfeit.

Pro has a tall burden of proof that he simply never meets. He never gives us an objective rubrics in which to judge who the “smartest” person in history was. In round 2 it’s easy to see that he doesn’t understand the burden. Con doesn’t need a counter example, a point that he argued quite well.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Neither Con nor Pro had particularly convincing arguments and both spent the debate on semantics, however Pro did not fulfill his BoP, so Con wins. I think Pro would have been better off had he defined "smartest" in the introduction, but he did not. Pro has forfeited, as thus loses conduct.