Evil does exist.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 28,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.
Questions or comments, please send a message, drop a comment.
Evil does exist.
Evil known as immorality or the wrongness of people behavior happens quite a bit.
Turn on the news, the slaying of folks ruthlessly on the streets, in their homes.
Mass shootings and I've seen things online about individuals who were held captive, assaulted , mutilated and destroyed .
So you know with this standpoint, may not be all that controversial as I thought. Just sharing current events calling them for what they are.
to be, or to be real
: to have real being whether material or spiritual
a: having objective independent existenceb: not artificial, fraudulent, or illusory : GENUINE
1a: the fact of suffering, misfortune, and wrongdoingb: a cosmic evil force2: something that brings sorrow, distress, or calamity
The argument in favor of solipsism:
- The only thing one has direct access to is the contents of one's own mind (one's mental states). What one knows most certainly are one's mental states – one's thoughts, experiences, emotions, and so on.
- Just because one sees an object does not mean that the object exists. One could be dreaming or hallucinating. There is no direct conceptual or logically necessary link between the mental and the physical.
- The experiences of a given person are necessarily private to that person. The contents of one's mind are the only things one has direct access to. One cannot get ‘outside’ of one's mind to encounter any other objects including other persons. Other minds are even more removed.
The basic form of the argument:
- Person's mental states are the only things they have access to.
One cannot conclude the existence of anything outside of their mental states.
- Therefore, only their mental states exist.
Nihilism is a philosophy that rejects values and the valuation society places on people, objects, and life, and instead states that everything is meaningless.
Cosmic Nihilism (Cosmic Pessimism)Cosmic nihilism is seen as the more hyper-rational branch of thought, which states that there is no meaning for the truth to be found in the universe.8It takes this one step further by also saying that any meaning created by human beings — such as love, family, freedom, and joy — is a fiction used as a coping strategy while we wait to die. Due to this, it is usually referenced as the next step after atheism.
What happens is we identify what has happened as 'evil' in our opinion and subjective take on the matter. The debate in fact says 'evil does exist' meaning we are discussing the general noun of 'evil' and not the adjective for actions.When we identify anything, we use terms.Is that correct?
What am I identifying?
What are we identifying?
There are things that happen and we give a name for it .
Do we want to argue semantics or reality?
Arguing reality if you want to go there, that task would be to prove what happens to people everyday really doesn't happen.
When you say "noun", that means "a thing", does it not?
any member of a class of words that typically can be combined with determiners (see DETERMINER sense b) to serve as the subject of a verb, can be interpreted as singular or plural, can be replaced with a pronoun, and refer to an entity, quality, state, action, or concept
A thing is something that exists. What is something that exist?
Premise 1 (P1): The only thing a person truly has definite access to is their mind's current state of interpreting whatever it is they believe is being interpreted throughout their supposed life.Premise 2(P2): No individual can conclusively and objectively prove that anything exists outside of what their mental state provides them.Conclusion (P1 + P2): Only the mental state can be claimed and objectively known to exist.
Well something like murder. Murder is a thing, is it not?
Is it my opinion or preference to call it evil?
I'm not trying to argue opinions and preferences. I'm certainly not trying to argue semantics because whatever we decide to call it, does that "it" exist?
Is "it" real? Is "it" a noun?
It is a thing most definitely.
Pro does not provide us News articles, furthermore is the total lack of framework for calling the News evil.Oh so you don't believe people murder people. You don't believe crime exist .
You're saying you believe it if I tell you to turn on a t.v. or Google search recent news or today's news.
Why do I have to tell you to read the news?
It's like saying the sun is in the sky. But I didn't provide a photo of it. You can use your own eyes to see it .
I deny that they are proof that evil exists, they are proof that violence exists and that there are acts we deem the adjective 'evil', 'barbaric' or 'violent'.Yes this is semantical. You call it violence, I call it evil. Now just earlier you were crying about a source of proof that these things exist, now you are saying there is proof of these things.
My head is in my hand. You know what I'm saying is true so your tactic now is to play reality as being false altogether.Don't go there.
I don't like this debate. A vote against con could be justified due to the repeated forfeitures... That said, con won.
Arguments... So weird, and both were in an organization format I hate.
Pro brings up hypothetical examples of things he deems evil, con counters with definitions of evil as some type of real force in the universe (that would have been fun), before switching gears to the possibility that nothing outside our minds exists. Pro rather than challenging this (there's a half dozen simple counters I can think of off the top of my head), just asks con if he's nothing...
Further, pro refused to provide real examples, even when implicitly asked to do so. I am left with the examples pro made only existing inside his mind, rather than having a verifiable existence outside of it.
Welcome to my new style.