Instigator / Pro
4
1438
rating
6
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#540

The universe is made from only one particle

Status
Finished

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

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

After 1 vote and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...

RationalMadman
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
6
1706
rating
562
debates
68.06%
won
Description

The science community has created a gigantic fraud on society by creating a complicated universe. The universe can be describe in much simpler terms according to the principles of Occam's razor. (The simplest solution to a problem is most often the best and most correct solution.)

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:

Pro has to establish his reasoning as to why the universe can be considered to be made of only one particle, the closest he came to justifying his position was: “Thus, using this principle we can create a universe with the simplest solution. We can start with the fewest number of particles that the universe can be made of. The answer to this must be, only one particle, because that is the smallest possible number that is available and it is a good starting point”

This doesn’t seem to provide any reasons as to why the universe is made of one particle, and even starts one particle is merely a starting point for consideration.

The remainder of his opening round appears to be stating there is more than one particle in the universe, repeatedly using plurals, and saying that the universe has three particles. It was completely unclear throughout the specifics of what pro was arguing, leave alone what his justification was.

Con, however seems to be doing his best to try and lose the debate by not engaging in any meaningful way, other with a dismissive counter, and rudeness. If pro had done better to express his position, con would have lost this. However con pointing out that pro repeatedly confuses his own point, then pointing out the absurdity of how a sphere is 3 things in round 4 - combined with pros lack of argument tipped me over the edge from a draw.

This was close - and there was no need for it to be close.

Conduct to pro because of round 4+5 rudeness including “Occam's Razor slice your neck, boom dead bye.”.