Instigator / Con
0
1511
rating
8
debates
56.25%
won
Topic
#5528

All reality is consisting of one substance

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
0
Better sources
0
0
Better legibility
0
0
Better conduct
0
0

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Rated
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
20,000
Voting period
Two months
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Minimal rating
1
Contender / Pro
0
1389
rating
413
debates
44.55%
won
Description

PRO's claim: All reality is consisting of one substance.
CON's claim: All reality is consisting of multiple substances

Substance being the most enduring and underlying reality of a thing.

I would like to make a correction on my end. The argument I have made has an error, for some reason I presumed that a modification is necessarily caused by substance. Though it can be argued that is the case, as Spinoza does, it should have been substantiated. Instead, I baked that attribute to modification in the definition. That was a mistake I have done.

I am actually not very confident in my position of pluralism or monism, as the reason why I wanted to debate this was because I wanted to see the argument from each side. Of course, that sadly did not happen. Right now, I am leaning for pluralism but still want to think about it some more.

I do not think this effects how things should be voted as I have made my argument and effectively refuted my opponents points. Meanwhile, my opponent made a point - refused to substantiate it - and then tried to run with other points.

I will also be commenting on my other debates and seeing if I had made any mistakes.

Let's see if the readers are swayed by fancy technical talk.

fundamentally dissimilar substances cannot interact or even detect one another