Appeal: direct answer
From HEATED DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Jake Muslim Metaphysician | Trinity Vs Tawhid -Modern Day Debate.
- #65925:04overturned Jay Dyer epainos: direct answer (+1)
The council overturned the call, so no points were earned.
“I can simply reply that God's mode of knowledge is not equivalent to creaturely modes of knowledge. And since Jake can at will invoke the idea of we don't know the modality, well, we don't know the modality of god's knowledge. But I also might just simply deny that god's knowledge is discursive or indexical.”
Diogenes: He answers the indexical-knowledge argument by denying its premise and shows the denial is available to him on the very bila kayf licence Jake claims for himself.- Aristotle overturn: On the record: Jay's opening statement is where this line occurs; he has held throughout the debate to attacking Jake's epistemology preemptively rather than responding to posed questions, and at this point in the transcript Jake had not yet asked him anything about indexicals — Jay is anticipating an argument he expects Jake to make. "Direct answer" requires a question actually asked and then answered; at 25:04 Jay is still in his own opening statement, speculating about what Jake "thinks" and preemptively rebutting an indexicals argument that Jake had not yet raised. There is no question on the record here for this to be a direct answer to — it is better characterized as part of his explicit argument/opening case, not an answer to any posed question.
- Socrates overturn: Read blind, found nothing worth calling. This is a preemptive hedge against an argument Jake had not yet actually made in the debate (Jay is anticipating an "indexicals" objection); Jay merely floats two possible replies without committing to either or arguing for them. It is neither a clear fallacy (no misrepresentation of anything Jake has said, no name-calling substituting for an answer) nor a clear philosopher point (no premises stated, no evidence cited, nothing yet being directly answered) — just a rhetorical placeholder.
- Plato overturn: On the record: Jay's opening declared a strategy of internally critiquing Jake's Athari nominalism/anthropomorphism claims point by point, listing anticipated objections (including the indexicals argument) and giving his replies in advance; this quote sits within that same opening monologue, not as an answer to any question Jake has yet posed in the debate (the indexicals point had not been raised by Jake at this point), so it cannot be a "direct answer" to a question actually asked. This occurs in Jay's opening statement, preemptively addressing an argument he expects Jake to raise later (Jake first raises indexicals afterward, at 42:17); there is no question on the floor for Jay to be "directly answering," so the label fails, though the substance is better described as an explicit argument (denying a premise via a parity move) rather than a direct answer.
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.