I will not contradict myself

My opponent has not addressed the proposed contradictions, so all I can offer is elaboration and further support.In addition, I will provide background into the series of questions as a whole.My Round 1 - Questions 1 & 2Source: http://www.philosophyexperiments.com...The presentation in the link is longer than mine. In mine I focused on Statement 4 of Scenario 1 (for my question 1) and the question for Scenario 2 (for my question 2). According to the site, 72% of people respond a contradictory manner. They do not feel reassured by any of the statements in Scenario 1, which indicates an association of identity with body, but they reward the mind in Scenario 2, indicating an association of identity with the mind.My opponent did not answer my question 2, so I had to resort to other answers to determine his identity association.My Round 1 - Questions 3 & 4Source: http://www.philosophersnet.com...Specifically, my question 3 corresponds to question 4 in the link, and my question 4 corresponds to question 8 in the link. My intention was to draw a contradiction as most people would say that an act that harms no one can't be morally wrong, but would ill treat incest as morally wrong. My opponent was consistent here, so no contradiction.My Round 1 - Questions 5 & 6Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...An ancient paradox involving our conception of identity of objects made of constituent parts. My previous explanation is all that really needs to be said. There were potential refutations here, but my opponent, for whatever reason, elected not to make them.My Round 1 - Questions 7 & 8; My Round 2 - Questions 1 & 2Source: http://www.philosophyexperiments.com...My exact scenario doesn't appear here. Mine is of my own making, though the underlying concepts are the same. I admit that my opponent surprised me here, as I think many people would elect to separate. The scenario is designed to test the underlying reasons behind being against abortion, with the rationale being that, if you are against abortion, then you should be against separation in the scenario. I commend my opponent for his consistent thinking here.My Round 1 - Question 9 & 10; My Round 2 - Questions 3 - 6; My Round 3 - Questions 1 & 2Source:????Unfortunately, I can't find the source for this, as I'm using a different computer. I will try and post it on Monday if I remember. The goal here is to criticize the notion of moral responsibility depending on being able to do otherwise as many people would still hold the murderer responsible, even though they couldn't have done otherwise due to the chip. I could not catch my opponent in a contradiction here.My Round 2 - Questions 7 - 9Source: http://www.philosophersnet.com...This test is designed to see if one's perceptions about where identity resides are consistent. It does this my putting body, mind, and soul in danger, and seeing what actions people take to preserve what. I was unable to complete this line of questioning, but was able to use answers here in other places.My Round 2 - Question 10Source: http://www.philosophyexperiments.com...Another line of questions designed to test moral consistency. Really only works if the participant does not allow for torture.My Round 3 - Question 3Source: http://www.philosophyexperiments.com...This is a pair of questions that use framing to illicit contradictory answers from people. I was unable to present the second question, as I wanted to give my opponent time to address what I already presented.My Round 3 - Question 4Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...Initially, I did not want to deal with contradictions involving God, so I did not inquire into religious matters. However, my opponent volunteered this information, so I chose to go with the Euthyphro dilemma which deals with the relationship between God and morality. I was unable to complete this line of questioning.My Round 3 - Question 5 & 6Source: http://www.philosophersnet.com...At this point I was reaching for questions. I would probably have either tried to invoke a direct contradiction among my opponent's answers, or an indirect contradiction between his answers regarding morality here and the "morality" of God.ConclusionMy proposed contradictions stand unrefuted. So other than the elaborations I have provided above, there is nothing left to add.Parent Sources:http://www.philosophersnet.com...http://www.philosophyexperiments.com...