Appeal: direct answer
From @deanwithrs Gets DESTROYED In Heated Debate On God Then RUNS.
- #194222:02upheld Dean Withers epainos: direct answer (+1)
The council upheld the call: Dean Withers earned 1 point.
“… the question in of itself is confused because platonic objects don't have a space suit [spatio]temporal location.”
Diogenes: He takes the host's three questions in order and answers "where is it?" by showing it assumes a location that abstract objects, on his stated view, do not have (the same assumption would bind the host's God); he then answers "how do you know" directly (a justified belief, justified by intuition).- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S1 has held since the opening that the laws of logic are Platonic objects, immaterial and outside the causal chain, with no spatiotemporal location; this line, delivered as the first of three promised answers ("I can answer all three of those questions"), applies that same standing position to the "where is it" question rather than departing from it. Dean does not refuse the question or demand a prior issue be settled before proceeding; he gives substantive content — that "where" presupposes spatial location, which abstract objects lack, an answer he repeats consistently at 27:05-27:23 and parallels to God's non-spatial existence under Cooley's own theism — and then goes on to answer the remaining two questions as promised, which is genuine engagement with what was asked rather than a stalling framework objection.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "framework objection", on the same ledger as the callout. Cooley's repeated "where is it?" presupposes that anything real must occupy a spatiotemporal location, which is exactly what is in dispute given Dean's Platonism; Dean names that presupposition and denies it with a reason (platonic objects are by definition outside space and time), and later strengthens the point by noting Cooley's own God, on classical theism, likewise lacks spatiotemporal location outside the incarnation. He does not simply refuse to answer — he goes on to address the "what grounds it" and "how do you know" questions as well, so this is a reasoned objection to a loaded presupposition rather than a dodge.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Dean's position of record is Platonic realism about the laws of logic as mind-independent abstracta outside the causal chain; this line applies that declared view directly to answer the "where" question, holding rather than departing from it. Dean answers Cooley's repeated "where is it?" with the substantive Platonist position that abstracta of this kind categorically lack spatiotemporal location — a real, first-order answer to the question posed (the standard Platonist reply to "where is the number 7?"), not a refusal to engage, and he even applies the same logic reflexively to Cooley's own God concept. This tracks Dean's declared metaphysics (Platonic realism, objects "outside the causal chain") stated from early in the exchange, so it is a consistent, direct response rather than an evasion.
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.