The cause of the universe, must be a sentient/ personal being

"Rather than a 'bare assertion', my argument that the universe only exists in our awareness of it is a self-evident truth, that is, it is known to be true by understanding its meaning without proof."False. It is self-evident that the universe existed much longer before we did due to all the evidence we have gatherd within nature. Your argument is horrible. "Rather than a 'bare assertion', my argument that the universe only exists in our awareness of it is a self-evident truth, that is, it is known to be true by understanding its meaning without proof."It's not a self-evident truth. It's a bare assertion, and a logical fallacy. "However, if proof is required, then I suggest Con demonstrate a universe that exists which we are not aware of, or for that matter, any 'thing' that exists that humans are not aware of. This Con cannot do; because to do so would be to concede 'awareness' is the cause of the existence ."Switching the burden of proof. We know the external univers exists prima facie. The burden is not on me to show that you are not a brain in a vat (or whatever nonsense you are spewing), the burden is on you. "This self-evident truth is something Con inadvertently proves the validity of by stating"Yes. This doesn't mean you can claim anything is self-evident, and therefore you do not have to argue for it. Lets try your logic: "The cause of the universe, must be a sentient/ personal being" is false. Why? It's a self-evident truth. Because the negation of the resolution is self-evident, then vote Con....This is is where your logic gets you."which is the same as saying 'I (a personal, sentient human being) am aware of some evidence ."Yes. But a person being aware of evidence, does not mean that the evidence would not exist if the person didn't experience it. This is a non-sequitur."I build on this self-evident truth"This is why the rest of your argument fails, its not self-evident. If I extend my arm out and touch something beyond me, it is self-evident that there is something beyond me. Your intuition is all out of wack I believe. "to conclude that only a sentient personal being could be the cause of the universe because it is our conscious that gives our senses reality"This just means that we experience an external reality that already exists."and since there is no evidence that any other being has a conscious awareness of the universe then by the process of elimination and by reason I argue the beings who are aware of the universe must be the beings who caused that universe to exist."But your argument is based on a false premise. Therefore, the resolution hasn't been affirmed. If we can say things are self-evident without proof, then the negation of the resolution is self-evident. Vote Con."My opponent has given no reason to think that the universe didn't exist when humans weren't around."I urge voters to deduct conduct points for Pro, as I provided evidence of The Big Bang to prove that humans were not around and he even quoted me. He is being intellectually dishonest. Pro did not meet his burden of proof, and has the most outagrous argument I have ever heard. You can say something is self-evident, so you do not have to prove it. I wish all debates could be that easy!