Instigator / Pro
8
1266
rating
119
debates
15.97%
won
Topic

Magick isn't real

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
0
6
Sources points
4
4
Spelling and grammar points
2
1
Conduct points
2
0

With 2 votes and 3 points ahead, the winner is ...

Polytheist-Witch
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Religion
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
30,000
Contender / Con
11
1511
rating
1
debates
100.0%
won
Description
~ 0 / 5,000

No information

Added:
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better spelling and grammar
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

I agree with Pro but Con stole the argument for me and neither of them used sources.

Added:
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better spelling and grammar
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Con's tone and attitude to Pro is horrendous in Round 2. That being said, Pro concedes that part of what Science evolved from is metaphysics and also concedes that science is a way to understand Magick.

What is clear to me is both endorse tai chi and such arts and both believe in the benefits. Pro says that Magick is not real because it can be explained by science and Con says that Magick is real only when it is scientifically valid (they don't use these words but they admit it can't make food and other things).

So, to me Pro insufficiently proved Magick false while conceding that science is a result of it and expansion on it in terms of explaining how or why it works but not that it disproves Magick.