Biological reincarnation is real.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.
It's evident, it's true that the topic is correct. It's scientific as in realizing everything around us.
Even philosophically broached by Swami Satchidananda . Everything that is will be.
That's as far as I'll go in the description. If you're really sharp, you'll see the topic is fact and non-contestable .
*Looking for arguments against only biological reincarnation*
- Pro bears the full burden of proof, and failure to uphold such alone is sufficient for a con victory. The definition of reincarnation itself informs us that it is a "philosophical or religious concept," so pro also holds the burden to prove that it is a biological one as well.
- Biological: of or relating to biology or to life and living processes
- Reincarnation: reincarnation, also known as rebirth or transmigration, is the philosophical or religious concept that the non-physical essence of a living being begins a new life in a different physical form or body after biological death.
- Real: having objective independent existence (b) not artificial, fraudulent, or illusory.
- Pro has not made an argument for the resolution...
- You just never learn, do you?
