Instigator / Pro
7
1500
rating
4
debates
50.0%
won
Topic
#5006
Re3: Humans suffer due to existence
Status
Voting
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Six months
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
2
1493
rating
24
debates
62.5%
won
Description
I will try to prove that with existence we suffer.
This is a re - debate of https://www.debateart.com/debates/4819-re2-humans-suffer-due-to-our-birth. After correcting the mistake of existence before birth and to allow for new counter - arguments against my arguments.
I'm new to debating and to this platform, point out any possible improvement.
I appreciate your time and effort.
Thank you.
Round 1
First of all I like to thank my contender for accepting this debate. And give thanks to the readers.
P1: Suffering includes death (S1).
P2: "... all living organisms" die (S2).
C1: Living organisms suffer.
P3: Living organisms are existing (S3).
P4: Living organisms suffer (C1).
C2: Living organisms suffer due to existence.
P5: Humans are a living organism (S4).
P6: Living organisms suffer due to existence (C2).
C3: Humans suffer due to existence.
I thank my contender's time and effort. And looking forward to the next argument.
Thanks for new debate.
Thanks to readers in reading this. This will be a different format than normal.
A few questions to better understand your position.
Q&A
All living organisms suffer.
Some living organisms have consciousness.
Is suffering dependent on consciousness?
Does non sentient or non conscious beings suffer?
Are there non living organisms, like rocks, that can suffer?
P3: Living organisms are existing (S3).P4: Living organisms suffer (C1).C2: Living organisms suffer due to existence.
Are these examples for suffering?
Being crushed
Flattened
Pushed
Rejected
P5: Humans are a living organism (S4).P6: Living organisms suffer due to existence (C2).C3: Humans suffer due to existence
Are you saying existence is the cause for suffering?
Is bellow statement true or false:
"we understand and can witness suffering because our unique human ability to comprehend suffering."
If we can witness suffering because our ability to do so.
Can suffering be independent from us and our existence?
Round 2
Forfeited
Extend
Round 3
First of all I like to thank my friend for their arguments. And give thanks to the readers.
Really sorry about accidental forfeiture in the previous round. Totally due to my ignorance, since DebateArt doesn't reliably inform rounds I should've kept an alarm clock. Really sorry about that everyone.
P7: Yes ("Is suffering dependent on consciousness?").
P8: Only when there's consciousness, there's suffering. So it doesn't matter whether there's perception or not. For example loneliness or existential crisis doesn't depend on perception (“Does non sentient or non conscious beings suffer?”).
P9: Nope. As in P8 no consciousness (“Are there non living organisms, like rocks, that can suffer?”).
P10: As S1 defines, since it causes pain or distress, yes (“Are these examples for suffering?”).
P11: Yup, but not the root cause (“Are you saying existence is the cause for suffering?”).
P12: False since suffering is not unique to humans as stated in P9 (“Is bellow statement true or false:").
P13: I probably don't understand the question. But suffering is an experience or a feeling, same as joy. So like we can decide whether to be joyful or not as we wish, we can also decide whether to suffer or end it (“Can suffering be independent from us and our existence?”).
C4: I hope I have successfully answered all the questions.
Thank you for the wonderful argument.
I thank my friend’s time and effort. And looking forward to the next argument.
You present some interesting comments.
Thus far we read that non consious objects or beings do not suffer. Is this correct pro?
Therefore we may produce a list. Pro, is the bellow list correct? :
Rocks get crushed = no suffering
Germs get crushed =no suffering
Jelly fish get crushed = no suffering
Fish gets crushed = suffering
Bear gets crushed = suffering
Human gets crushed = suffering
If all above is correct, appears that suffering is dependent on concsiousness.
What is preventing us from saying "consiousness causes suffering" instead of the given "existence causes sufferint?"
Round 4
First of all I like to thank my friend for their arguments. And give thanks to the readers.
Not for the sake of argument,
Wonderful, wonderful. My friend is most wise. Many, not even I could've imagined consciousness leads to suffering. Oh I'm so happy.
P14: Yes (“...non consious objects or beings do not suffer. Is this correct pro?”).
P15: Yes (“...is the bellow list correct? … Human gets crushed = suffering”).
P16: Correct (“appears that suffering is dependent on concsiousness.”).
P17: Nothing, since it's completely true.
Without existence there will be no suffering.
And without consciousness there will be no sufferable life.
(You could have a complete body but without consciousness. Through accidents, drugs, etc…)
So in a sense,
Suffering <- existence
Existence <- consciousness
Suffering <- consciousness
Alternatively,
Consciousness -> existence
Existence -> suffering
Consciousness -> suffering
In an example,
Why can we eat an apple?,
Because there was an apple.
(Cause being, apple’s existence).
Why was there an apple?,
Because there was an apple tree.
(Cause being, apple tree’s existence).
Why can we eat an apple?,
Because there was an apple tree.
(Cause being, apple tree’s existence).
Logically,
A -> B
B -> C
A -> B -> C
A -> C
So both statements are correct in different perspectives. Without contradicting each other (“What is preventing us from saying "consiousness causes suffering" instead of the given "existence causes sufferint?"”).
C5: I hope I have successfully answered all the questions.
Thank you for the wonderful argument.
I thank my friend’s time and effort. And looking forward to the next argument.
Hey
Thanks again for this debate.
I have no follow up.
As hard as I tried to ask more questions, I think my last post presents the best case as con. Anything else is just repeat. I dont see a point in doing that - making you or others read more of the same thing is not interesting or helpful.
I will forfiet my last round to tie those up.
Voters (if any) can choose a winner if they wish.
Have a good one. Cheers.
Round 5
First of all I like to thank my friend for their arguments. And give thanks to the readers. And this being the final round, I thank all who took this journey. And I thank my friend for teaching me a lot and making me very happy. And also I thank everyone else.
P18: I really hoped my friend could refute P17 since even I think there could be a problem there.
C6: I thank my friend for enlightening us that consciousness leads to suffering. I really learned a lot and I appreciate it greatly.
I really enjoyed this debate and I will reinstate this debate again to anybody who is interested to debate this again. And it would be a great pleasure having another debate with my wise friend.
Wishing my friend and everyone a merry Christmas, happy new year and a present and a future without suffering.
I thank my friend's time and effort. And looking forward to the next argument.
I FORFEITED this round per previous round's post.
Extend.
Minor nitpick: Here those are referred to as extensions, rather than forfeitures.