Appeal: evidence
From FULL SAVAGE DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Indiana Brunner: Protestant Bible Wrong???.
- #10291:11:14overturned Jay Dyer epainos: evidence (+2)
The council overturned the call, so no points were earned.
“Trello [Trullo] says, we affirm the canons of the previous councils, and we affirm explicitly the Carthaginian list of the canon.”
Diogenes: This is the mechanism by which his circle can be checked, named with its links, Carthage ratified at Trullo and Trullo ratified by the Seventh Council, and hedged where his memory is weak ("going from memory", "I forget the exact date").- Aristotle overturn: On the record: S0 has held since the opening that tradition, councils, and apostolic succession are the mechanism for fixing the canon, a position argued against S1 earlier in the debate; by 71:14, however, S1 had long since been removed from the space and no opponent remained on the floor, this being part of the same solo slide-walkthrough monologue. The floor rule holds that a monologue delivered with no opponent present to answer or be answered is not judged on either ledger regardless of its quality; this line falls squarely within the unaccompanied canon-list walkthrough that runs from roughly 62:00 onward with no interlocutor on the floor.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "evidence". Jay cites a specific, checkable historical mechanism, the Council in Trullo's explicit affirmation of the Carthaginian canon list, later ratified by the Seventh Ecumenical Council, as the concrete means by which the earlier variation among church-father lists was settled. This moves beyond bare assertion of authority ("ecumenical councils decide") to naming an actual conciliar chain that can be checked, which is exactly the kind of mechanism the canon question calls for.
- Plato overturn: On the record: S0 has held the canon-variation/tradition-mechanism argument since he first raised it against S1 earlier in the exchange; this later solo elaboration, delivered after S1 left the space, is monologue commentary rather than part of a live exchange, so no evidence point can attach to it here. This quote falls in the same unbroken solo monologue segment as the 65:25 passage: S1 was disconnected around 59:00 and Mike/S3 had also left by 62:00, leaving S0 alone narrating Lee McDonald's canon lists to the audience until a new caller ("Snek") arrives at 74:43. With no opponent on the floor to answer or be answered, the floor principle holds that this monologue, however sound its content, is not judged on either ledger.
- Thesmothetes overturn: By the rule: the floor: no opponent present. The transcript confirms Indiana Brunner had already been disconnected from the space (S3 at [58:56]-[59:08] confirms "did Indiana get booted? Yep"), and S0 explicitly closes out that exchange at [61:59] with "we had a good conversation there for over an hour" before turning solo to "do a little brief look at this before we go to the next person in line" — a walkthrough of Lee McDonald's canon lists delivered to the audience alone, unbroken until a new caller arrives at [74:43]. The quoted line at [71:14] falls squarely inside that solo narration with no opponent on the floor to answer or be answered, so under the floor rule it cannot be scored on either ledger regardless of the quality of its content.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.