Instigator / Pro

1486

rating

debates

45.0%

won

Topic

#4643

Pluto is not a planet

Status

Finished

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

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

Bella3sp

Tags

space

Parameters

Publication date: 06.28.2023 06:33PM
Last updated date: 07.31.2023 05:05AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 2
Time for argument: Two days
Max argument characters: 10,000
Voting period: One month
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

Bella3sp

1524

rating

debates

75.47%

won

Description

No information

Round 1

the_quiet_poet9

06.29.2023 02:29PM

Pro

Claim

Pluto is not a planet

Evidence

For an object to be classified as a planet, it has to meet the three criteria of the IAU (International Astronomical Union):

1. It orbits the sun

2. It has enough mass to form a nearly round shape

3. It has "cleared the neighborhood" around its orbit (be big enough to be gravitationally dominant)

Although Pluto meets the first two criteria, it does not meet the third and so is therefore not a planet. It is instead classified as a dwarf planet.

The reason why Pluto was ever considered to be a full planet, is because before 2006, there was no working definition of "planet" due to lack of scientific knowledge.

Conclusion

Pluto is not a planet because it does not meet the three criteria of the IAU

Sources:

https://www.loc.gov/everyday-mysteries/astronomy/item/why-is-pluto-no-longer-a-planet/#:~:text=Answer,neighboring%20region%20of%20other%20objects.%E2%80%9D

https://www.britannica.com/story/why-is-pluto-no-longer-a-planet

Bella3sp

06.30.2023 04:50PM

Con

Point:

Case:

This one is short, I am just providing evidence that Pluto, no matter names, is a planet.

Burden

Burden is shared.

In order for me, con, to win, I just have to prove pluto is in fact a planet.

While pro has the objective to do the opposite; prove pluto is not a planet under any circumstance.

Contentions

I. Pluto is a dwarf planet

Now although Pluto is now the following:

"The International Astronomical Union (IAU) downgraded the status of Pluto to that of a dwarf planet because it did not meet the three criteria the IAU uses to define a full-sized planet. Essentially Pluto meets all the criteria except one—it “has not cleared its neighboring region of other objects.”

https://www.loc.gov/everyday-mysteries/astronomy/item/why-is-pluto-no-longer-a-planet/#:~:text=Answer,neighboring%20region%20of%20other%20objects.

Pluto is a planet, just a dwarf planet. But does it matter if it's full sized or dwarfed? No. Because Pluto is still a planet.

This debate regards "is Pluto a planet" not:

Is Pluto a full sized planet

Therefore, I have cleared my burden.

Rebuttals

For an object to be classified as a planet, it has to meet the three criteria of the IAU (International Astronomical Union):
1. It orbits the sun
2. It has enough mass to form a nearly round shape
3. It has "cleared the neighborhood" around its orbit (be big enough to be gravitationally dominant)

Although Pluto meets the first two criteria, it does not meet the third and so is therefore not a planet. It is instead classified as a dwarf planet.

The reason why Pluto was ever considered to be a full planet, is because before 2006, there was no working definition of "planet" due to lack of scientific knowledge.

No need for rebuttals. Pro has proved my point already.

This debate is not about if pluto is a full-sized planet, but rather, is pluto a planet. So, regardless of if its dwarfed or full sized, pluto is a planet.

Pro has not cleared their burden, expect for furthering mine. In this case, pro would have to prove why pluto is first off, not a dwarf planet, and not a full sized planet.

Source:

https://www.loc.gov/everyday-mysteries/astronomy/item/why-is-pluto-no-longer-a-planet/#:~:text=Answer,neighboring%20region%20of%20other%20objects.

Round 2

the_quiet_poet9

07.01.2023 12:40AM

Pro

Sorry, I should have defined "planet" before we started the debate.

If I understand con's arguments correctly, they are saying that:

1. Pluto is a dwarf planet

2. A dwarf planet is a planet

3. Therefore, Pluto is a planet

However, the definition of a dwarf planet, according to Oxford Languages (https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en), is "a celestial body resembling a small planet but lacking certain technical criteria that are required for it to be classed as such."

According to this definition, a dwarf planet is not the same thing as a planet, and it does not follow through that Pluto is a planet.

Bella3sp

07.01.2023 05:05AM

Con

This caught me off guard, but..

I challenge pro's definition of a dwarf planet.

According to NASA:

"April 22, 2015. According to the International Astronomical Union, which sets definitions for planetary science, a dwarf planet is a celestial body that -orbits the sun, has enough mass to assume a nearly round shape, has not cleared the neighborhood around its orbit and is not a moon."

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/what-is-a-dwarf-planet

^^ All planets are celestial bodies.

If Pluto was not a planet, would it be called dwarf? No, it's called a dwarf planet.

We would categorize this into two different things, a planet has two different "settings":

Dwarf planet
Full-sized planet

As well as the fact that Pluto meets all the criteria for a planet, the majority, just classified as a dwarf planet because it only lacks one thing.

For example, humans sometimes have no arms, which the majority of people have, but they are still humans.

Barney

07.01.2023 06:26AM

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:

This is very close, I suspect with a third round pro could have sealed it.

R1 Pro gave a definition, which con flipped to define Pluto as a type of planet.
R2 pro came back to say that type of planet is not really a planet, but did not expand upon why beyond a cherry-picked dictionary entry. Con came back with an analogy about humans being able to be short part of the usual criteria but remain human.

The debate is left begging the question of why is a dwarf planet not a type of planet? Without an answer to this, con takes the win.

...

If redoing this, I advise changing the resolution to an Ought statement. Dictionaries are ever changing, so how we ought to classify Pluto is of more interest than how some people currently do today.