Instigator / Con

Dual topic : Are there really any such things as guarantees? Is it really a fact that you're guaranteed to die?


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

Winner & statistics

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
Voting period
One month
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Contender / Pro

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.

I hear this expression "There are not many guarantees in life but one thing for sure, you will die".

Upon thinking about this, we're only going by deductive reasoning to make the conclusive statement.

No such thing as satisfaction guaranteed either. Otherwise, why have an option or scenario of offering the money back for a purchase? Huh? Huh?

Look out, anybody looking to think outside the box or stay inside it, come-on.

Questions on the topics, drop a comment.

Round 1
Let us start with a refresher on what a guarantee is. I feel as though the meaning of it has gotten lost in the comments.

Here it is in the way I mean it. A guarantee is not a fact but a declaration upstaged, purported, touted, strongly convicted to happen and will . But indeed no evidence to happen and that is my objection. 

It can be something however that is based on deductive reasoning which I will expound what I mean on that.

A deductive conclusion in general supported by specific cases that have occurred .

For example, every product made by a company has sold so therefore it is guaranteed that the next one made will be sold.

It's satisfaction guaranteed . If that's the case, why is there a money back " guarantee " on top of the original "guarantee"?

You are guaranteed to die. You will die. This is deductive based on a history of us expiring.

But science fiction is becoming more and more fact. Breakthroughs in medical science and technology just evolving .

I understand mechanical and robotic adaptions exist for those that are frail. Things such as these are on the raise in favor of humanity survival.

Remember "guarantee" is not another word for fact. It's a declaration touted as something that WILL come to pass. 

You can't have that "will" part in there without evidence attached to it.

Many of these things that are so called guaranteed are deductive calculated positions like forecasting.

Meteorologists do this with weather trackers. These things aren't bound to happen so therefore the weather person isn't always accurate in their forecast.

One more thing before I close out here is something besides science that can change the outcome of death.

Let's look at the possibility of divine plans.

We read in the book of 1 Corinthians 15:51
"For sure, I am telling you a secret. We will not all die, but we will all be changed. "

So there it is. I understand we have colloquially statements about many things and can overextend the branch of confidence .

Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Let's stay following by the reality that actually is as we know it.

I believe you are correct when it comes to the fact a guarantee can be made on deductive reasoning.
But if it is that because a guarantee is made on deductive reasoning, and that in some cases this reasoning can be wrong, that does not expel the fact that a guarantee is a guarantee.

Is it not, based on deductive reasoning, that a human is guaranteed to be born with two legs and two arms? We cannot expel this fact because sometimes people are not born with two arms or two legs. It is a guarantee, or very highly guaranteed fact. Is it not guaranteed, based on not only deductive reasoning, but also pure fact, that when a coin is flipped it will land on one of its two sides? 

The argument is that guaranteed isn't actually guaranteed because it is placed on deductive reasoning and sometimes deductive reasoning is wrong. But when deductive reasoning is wrong, albeit very rarely based on something like death, that is a very special case. And a few special cases do not eliminate the mounds of other cases where a guarantee did happen.

On the subject of guaranteed death, you brought up how humanity is evolving, and how death is written to be stopped or stalled by some divine force. This does not expel the subject of guaranteed death, because, for now, it is guaranteed we will expire as mortals, whether it be naturally or by some outside force. This is a guarantee that is not only held on by some sort of deductive reasoning, but by pure scientific fact.

I lay out a very simple structure that may very well have its flaws, and I am open to con finding them so that I may fix the holes I made to build a boat that is good enough to ride the waves of this argument. I believe con has an outstanding argument, but there are so many guarantees he would have to dispute or debunk, and there is probability linked in, and this would mean debunking an entire mathematical process.
Round 2
" Is it not, based on deductive reasoning, that a human is guaranteed to be born with two legs and two arms?  "

It can be deducted but not guaranteed because there are people that are born without limbs so it is not guaranteed. It is not guaranteed the person will be born. A newborn is referred to as a miracle.

"We cannot expel this fact because sometimes people are not born with two arms or two legs. It is a guarantee, or very highly guaranteed fact."

This is conflicting. A person either will which is backed up by some evidence or possibly will or not be .
"Guaranteed fact" is an oxymoron. A guarantee doesn't mean in the true realm of causality something will happen but just showcased, played up to be . A fact is not another word for guarantee. I think I said this in the last turn. These two words don't belong in the same context.

Then you add "highly" to it which was the strongly convicted, touted emphasis I was talking about.

The idea of guarantees are truly non sequiturs. This comes from a social network framework wrapped around a feeling of assurance wishful thinking to deliver on promises to ourselves.

This is likewise with the idea of promises.

"Is it not guaranteed, based on not only deductive reasoning, but also pure fact, that when a coin is flipped it will land on one of its two sides? "

If the probability didn't exist that it could land on edge , it would be a fact it lands on a side. High probability or probability or deductive calculation is different from fact that's fixated. It's not erratic, it's the same everytime which is not what guarantee comes out to be.

A guarantee talks a big game but doesn't really have the muscle behind it to support the weight of a play. It's backed up with perhaps "feel good assurance". Which makes sense as it is a social pledge or oath on good faith, not evidence.

Like in a poker game, the player that perhaps feels so confident has the attitude "I can't lose with what I use, I'm hot tonight". The player believes this so much, they feel like they can bluff the other players. The player has won before, yes guaranteed, why not this time?

No, the player can still lose in spite of feeling good. They feel fine until the loss as the the other players saw right through that poker face.

I just want to reiterate what we're talking about here. A guarantee is not another word for fact. 

An example, satisfaction guaranteed or your money back. Wait a minute, being that it's guaranteed, meaning something that WILL be the case, there is no "or your money back". 

It's a non sequitur so the idea of "guarantees" is to be just thrown out. So far you're demonstrating the non sequiturs in your responses without realizing it. It's because the words , the essence of things are not being looked at when it comes to this.

On the one hand, the position is "something will happen" as a matter of fact. Then on another facet to it, the result is subject to change. That something that "will happen" is not really fact. But it's deductively concluded to happen. All that means is generalized to happen assumed from history but not necessarily bound to occur.

You used the phrase "highly guaranteed". Like saying highly probable. Which that works realistically. A high chance or low chance goes with deduction. However, something that will happen is a one way outcome. There are no different tiers of probability.

Pro, If I had a 1-dollar bill and gave you that dollar bill, is it not guaranteed that you now have that dollar bill?
Round 3
I'm to quote exactly what you said. We're going to use the very words you used to show your idea of "guarantee" versus what I'm talking about in this topic.

Also kudos to you for being direct and down to the point. Very rare if it all happens on this site. 

"Pro, If I had a 1-dollar bill and gave you that dollar bill, is it not guaranteed that you now have that dollar bill?'

It's not guaranteed that I have it. It's a fact that I have it. It's like a mantra now , everybody say it with me. The word fact is not another word for guarantee.

Saying "guaranteed that you NOW have it" doesn't fit because the concept of a guarantee is before something happening, not after.

I now have satisfaction. There's no need in a guarantee of it. I already have it. I have it not because it was guaranteed but due to what the actual cause of it was. A guarantee is you telling me something will happen aside from dealing with actual cause as we know it.

I'd be satisfied with something regardless of your so called guarantee or assurance.

I forfeit this debate. I have now been educated on something. A guarantee is more a promise than fact.
Round 4
Kudos to you. There may be hope for this site yet.

This is a very rare response. Probably the first . Often or usually the individual opposed to my stance tends to be evasive and dismissive to my points like they don't exist.

Then those that vote take on the same spirit. The individual opposed will tend to strawman or misrepresent and neglect a lot of details from the context of the description and introduction.

Instead of understanding what I'm saying and what I mean or making the effort to do so, the opposing side brings their idea of certain terms and attaches them to my position.

You can have use of your own terms but don't impose and force them upon my position. You have to go accordingly to each position .

You don't do that with every car with a universal approach that is universal to you. Each car has their own manual and code book. So the repair procedures have to be adjusted appropriately to each unique model like arguing to each unique position.

So this is duly noted . 

Are there really any guarantees ?

When it comes to actual world events like death, guarantees are absent. They have no part in them. Nothing happens by assuring it without evident cause .

I get diagnosed with an illness that the physician says I have 6 months more to live. The physician assured me, guaranteed that it will be six months.

Why wasn't this a guarantee? 

I took advice from a different physician or simply I was misdiagnosed.

Nothing happens just by assuring it will. No such thing as that. If we have evidence for something to happen which is not exactly extrapolated deductively, we can throw out the needless assurance .