During or after this debate concludes, my opponent ought to read the "Liar Game" manga

1) In my opponent's response, I cannot help but notice how precisely he responded in terms of his interest in manga. Specifically, he prefers the protagonist to be somewhat of an anti-hero (good to some extent, but totally willing be down with acts perceived as evil). Ladies and gentleman, the leading male protagonist of Liar Game would in fact be considered an anti-hero. Akiyama is a infamous Con artist who has bankrupted a high level corporation in the past and has no problems with sending people home with millions of dollars of debt hence ruining their lives (as a result of defeating them in the Liar Game tournament)(which he has stated himself). On the other hand, with the leading female's influence, has shown himself willing to save the games losers by sacrificing his winnings. Furthermore, whereas I have not read samurai Deeper Kyo, I've read every single chapter of Berserk to date. My opponent's preference of this manga shall be his downfall in this debate. 2) Indeed, this question need not be discussed any further. 3) I've decided to drop this one on the basis that I don't need it. 4) My opponent accuses Akiyama's philosophy of being ludicrous, however shows a grave misunderstanding of it by concluding that it can be somehow interpreted as suggesting that everyone is a liar. This by no means is the point of Akiyama's speech. Rather, the point is to use doubt as means of understanding other individuals. In other words, Akiyama is insisting the female lead (and perhaps the reader) to BE Skeptical (which, as evidenced by chapter 83, allowed her to better understand another one of the protagonists in the story, but I won't get into that) of other people. Which, ironically enough, is my opponent's user name . . . ergo, when really thinking about it, I really don't have to provide this interesting case which CON speaks of seeing as how my he already adheres to the ideal without even knowing it, hence making it an even more pleasurable read as his ideal is being agreed with, explored upon and even placed into the form of entertainment. To quote Akiyama's own words: "Question them, suspect them . . . and take a good long look into their hearts. " If an idea like this doesn't befit someone who calls himself TheSkeptic, I don't know what does. :D 5) So far, I've shown that the series syncs with my opponent's ideals. Noting that he likes Berserk for the reasons he stated, I've even shown how he clearly matches his preferences momentarily. However, I'd once again like to express the notion that this isn't the only means of me winning this debate. As long as you agree that my opponent reading this manga is good for him, I've done my job. =============================== Questions concerning elements of "Liar Game" | =============================== 1. I believe this issue of "regurgitated knowledge" is the heart of the matter with my opponent as this line about "To appeal to me intellectually, I need to constantly read the forefront of intellectual thought, which mainly philosophy books and articles can do for me" stands out to me. The purpose of this manga is not the same as a peer reviewed article or even a philosophy book. Rather, the purpose is mostly to entertain the readers. When I pointed out that this manga would appeal to my opponent as an intellectual, the point I was making was that intellectual information was being put into the form of entertainment. There is indeed a great deal which my opponent can be enlightened by, but it's not the only means of appealing to him. 2. Lets take this one section at a time: "To summarize, he believes that doubting people is a way to get to know them better. " Correct. :) RE:"And while I agree this can happen many times, this is a non sequitor from the claim that we should doubt everyone. " False, unless my opponent is insisting that what he says below is non sequitor. RE:"You see, when I trust someone this is because I have judged their personality to a certain degree, and interpersonally ascribed them some bond of trust - the trust is stronger when I know their personality better (and of course, if their personality allows for trust as well). " Note the words judge and know how he is insisting that this thing called trust develops as he gets to learn more about the individual in questions personality. Finally, read the following page: . http://www.onemanga.com... From the information provided by my opponent's own mouth as well as the information provided from the series in question, we know 3 things: 1) My opponent uses doubt to instigate a relationship. Judging and gathering information is precisely what Akiyama speaks of as being what one ought to do; it is to doubt. My opponent truly is TheSkeptic 2) If you'll read the page in question, you'll note that there is never anything stated against the act of trusting others. What Akiyama states is that merely people often confuse trust with apathy. He believes the act of trust to be noble and has nothing against it. Put both of these facts together, reread my opponents response to Akiyama's philosophy and we notice that he by no means disagrees with it. On the contrary, he has merely misread the pages I provided and is actually AFFIRMING it RE:"Trusting or doubting someone isn't mainly the method that you use to get to know people, it is the RESULT of getting to know people. " False. You don't start questioning or examining an individuals intentions AFTER you know them. You do so beforehand. Even my opponent agrees with this. Trust can possibly be a result of getting to know people, but doubt certainly isn't limited to such. It can exist before and afterwords. 3. No, I agree. I do in fact want to appeal to my opponent intellectually, but this notion that this can only be done by arguing from standpoint which he claims to be interested in erroneous at best. For instance, whereas a child in elementary school may not show strong interest in mathematics or science, studying in both fields shall benefit him/her intellectually as he/she shall not only be more knowledgeable about the world, but possess the information needed to excel in education. Liar Game's dealings with mathematics, psychology and philosophy (which my opponent seems to disagree on) is where it excels intellectually. Liar's game strength is that it makes all of this "boring" stuff entertaining. Whether or not my opponent may have seen any of the intellecual information before is irrelevant. Through reading the series (assuming he has explored all of the involved concepts), he shall have a good time refreshing himself while being entertained by the plot and characters. 4. To top it all off, my opponent is by no means as concerned with philosophy being provided in his entertainment as he'd like you to believe. Having read every single chapter of Berserk, I know this without a doubt. Berserk's strong points are not philosophical (heck, at best, the subject only seriously exist in casual comments made in reference to causality from time to time). To top it off, he states he reads this manga for the sole reason that the protagonist is an anti hero (again, not something noticeably philosophical, although if it is, my case for Akiyama wins me the debate still).