Appeal: self-contradiction
From Debate! Pagan vs. Orthodox: Logos, Language & Metaphysics - Jay Dyer Vs CB Robertson.
- #9101:11:15upheld CB Robertson psogos: self-contradiction (+2)
The council upheld the call: CB Robertson gave away 2 points.
“I'm not making it a a universe [universal] claim... It was subjective from the beginning. It was subjective from the…” quote corrected
Diogenes: CB opened by stating "I happen to believe in objective evil, though I don't believe in objective good" and then said all objective-morality talk is "universally self delusion"; under pressure he recasts the same claim as subjective preference all along, without acknowledging the reversal.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: CB's declared position from the opening was a belief in "objective evil" alongside intuition-based, admittedly fallible moral knowledge; the quoted retreat to "subjective from the beginning" directly contradicts both that opening claim and his own restatement of it moments earlier in this very exchange, with no acknowledgment of the shift. CB opened the debate stating "I happen to believe in objective evil" (12:33), and moments before the quoted line he explicitly said "I believe that there is universal evil and rejection of all standards" (69:05). When Jay presses him to justify that universal/objective claim, CB pivots to denying he ever made a universal claim and insists "it was subjective from the beginning" — contradicting his own words from seconds earlier without any acknowledgment that he is reversing himself, which is exactly what the record shows him doing repeatedly through this whole exchange (Jay even calls out "you keep shifting the word").
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "self-contradiction". Just moments earlier (69:05-69:11) CB stated plainly, "I believe that there is universal evil and rejection of all standards," explicitly using the word "universal." Here, when pressed on how he justifies that universal claim, he denies ever making "a universe claim" and asserts "it was subjective from the beginning," reversing his own stated wording without acknowledging the shift. This seeds the extended confusion that follows (through ~105:34) where he oscillates between asserting and denying objective/universal truth.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S1 declared at the opening that he believes in objective evil (though not objective good) and held to that when pressed moments before this line ("I believe that there is universal evil"); the quoted line reverses that into a bare subjective preference without acknowledging the change, which is exactly the self-contradiction charged. CB opened by declaring "I happen to believe in objective evil, though I don't believe in objective good," and reaffirmed this moments earlier in this same exchange ("I believe that there is universal evil"). At 71:15, under Jay's pressure to justify that universal claim, he flatly denies ever making it and asserts "it was subjective from the beginning" — directly contradicting both his opening thesis and his own restatement minutes before, with no acknowledgment of the reversal.
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.