Appeal: evidence
From Muslim Twitter Triggered, Middleast Wars, Is America A Christian Country Debate With Sneako!.
- #18401:45:18tied, awaiting the moderator Riyadh epainos: evidence (+1)
The council is split: nothing counts until the moderator decides.
“Jefferson was not even at the writing of the constitutional convention.”
Diogenes: A checkable historical fact (Jefferson was in France as ambassador during the 1787 Constitutional Convention) offered to rebut SNEAKO's claim about Jefferson drafting the constitution.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S1 has held throughout the debate that the US is culturally/historically Christian in its founding roots even though not legally so, and here he uses a specific verifiable historical detail to counter SNEAKO's line of argument about Jefferson's role at the convention; this is consistent with, not a departure from, his standing method of citing historical particulars (colonies' religious tests, Thomas Hooker, etc.). This is a discrete, checkable historical claim (Jefferson was in France, not physically at the Philadelphia convention) offered to rebut SNEAKO's suggestion that Jefferson's notes/presence at the convention supported his framework argument. Thucydides confirms the fact is accurate and does the work claimed. It's a small, single-fact contribution, so minor severity and the "evidence" label both fit.
- Socrates overturn: Read blind, found nothing worth calling. This is a bare historical assertion (Jefferson was posted in Paris, not a delegate at the 1787 convention) offered with no citation, so like the 1.3% figure it doesn't clear the bar for "evidence." It isn't a fallacy either: S2 had just implied Jefferson's notes shaped the drafting, and S1's correction is on-topic and, per S2's own immediate half-concession ("wasn't even there"), essentially accurate — a small factual point in the back-and-forth, not a sophist move or a scored merit.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S1 has argued throughout that America's Christian character rests on founders' documented beliefs and history (Washington, Adams, the 13 colonies) rather than legal text; this line is a factual correction within that historical argument, not a departure from his position. The claim is a checkable, confirmed historical fact (Jefferson was serving as minister to France in 1787 and was not at the Constitutional Convention) offered to rebut SNEAKO's suggestion that Jefferson was iteratively drafting the document in person; it fits the evidence category even though brief.
- Thesmothetes leave: The dispute here is purely about whether a brief, unsupported-but-true historical correction ("Jefferson was not even at the writing of the constitutional convention") clears the bar for "evidence" or is instead too bare to score — Aristotle and Plato read the checkable historical fact itself as sufficient citation, while Socrates reads the lack of any offered source or reasoning as falling short. No enumerated rule cleanly settles which threshold governs a fact stated flatly but accurately and on-point (S2's own reply, "he wasn't there," shows it landed as a real correction rather than an assertion relied on unchallenged). This is a genuine disagreement of judgment about severity/sufficiency, not one a specific rule resolves.
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.