Instigator / Pro
7
1525
rating
24
debates
58.33%
won
Topic
#5050

Does free-will exist?

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
0

After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...

SethBrown
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Rated
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Minimal rating
None
Contender / Con
3
1233
rating
412
debates
39.56%
won
Description

Pro: Free will exists
Con: Free will doesnt exist

Both sides must provide arguments for their position

R1: Present opening arguments
R2: Rebutt your opponent's argument
R3: Respond to your opponent's rebuttal
R4: Rebutt your opponent's response to your rebuttal
R5: Closing statements, and address how the debate went (feel free to rebutt anything else here)

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 for needless insults.

Arguments… I actually really appreciate cons case of cause and effect; but when pro dismisses it as the human mind is the ultimate cause, he does not defend that the human mind is formed based on experience outside our control making it not the cause of itself. Thus with that defense in place, pro is able to hold the initiative.

Got to say that I am really lost as to the bit of pros case about random monoculars actively making any choices, just because we observe them. Choice implies a will, for which pros own arguments call upon a mind as the source. Still, he comes ahead l.

Sources should reply be used when challenging official stuff. Con could have taken the definition battle, had he just said who he was quoting.