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

Since this is the nearing the last round, I'll try to explain in even more detail my preferences, and how I see them to not align with the elements of Liar Game - of course, mainly by answering the questions asked. =================== Cross Examination =================== 1). My favorite book(s) are mainly books on philosophy - I am no fan of reading fiction or fantasy novels; they bore me to hell. I don't watch enough TV to follow a certain series (unless you count UFC as a series), but I do like the shows made by Joss Whedon (Firefly, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, etc. ). Mainly, though, the things I watch on TV are usually UFC or most of the shows on Comedy Central (and of course, Family Guy, Simpsons, South Park, etc. ) For manga, and I'd guess this would be most important, I don't read too much but I do like Samurai Deeper Kyo and Berserk (to name a few), for the sole reason that the protagonist is somewhat of an anti-hero. An anti-hero in the sense that they don't have common inhibitions about killing that many other protagonists from different stories have (there's an idiotic but recurring theme among manga about the sanctity of life and about love, or some crap). I like how even though these protagonists do have some "good side" to them, after all they can't pass off as entirely evil people and end the manga like that, they still like to do a lot of killing. 2). I guess this question doesn't need to be discussed any further. 3). Same here, since my opponent has decided to save his answer. 4). To be honest, I kind of expected this. Most manga have highly idealized beliefs, in this case believing everyone should be doubted. However, if we were to have a serious debate on this then I would clearly believe this belief to be ludicrous - not EVERYONE is a liar, and trust can form in many different ways (many theories of sociology deal with this). Unless my opponent can give me an interesting case from Liar Game as to why I should believe in this, then not only would I find Liar Game given off as just another manga with high ideals, but I'll disagree with it as well - which makes it less pleasurable to read. And since you do this in the following section, I'll answer to that there. 5). Sure, if you show that Liar Game fits my preferences then you win. If you have another way you think you can win, then go ahead and attempt to employ that as well. ==================== Questions concerning elements of "Liar Game" ==================== 1. In summary, though, they are all boring or unoriginal. I really don't have a care for different concepts or beliefs in psychology, since as an "intellectual" I appeal mainly to philosophy. In philosophy, however, all I see is doubt and ethics of deception. I don't know what you mean by doubt, unless you are referring to epistemology and to the question of how much do we really know. If this is the case, then this is definitely interesting but will still be regurgitated knowledge - unless Liar Game can give new insights into this philosophical issue (which would be amazing for a manga), then I won't appeal to me intellectually. Same with "ethics of deception", which I can only take to be as whether or not lying is moral - this would play into ethical theories which are commonly discussed, meaning once again this is regurgitated material. 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. 2. Let's see if Akiyama's defense of his assertion is original, least of all convincing: To summarize, he believes that doubting people is a way to get to know them better. And while I agree this can happen many times, this is a non sequitor from the claim that we should doubt everyone. 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). 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. 3. The problem is, if you want to appeal to ME intellectually then it can only be done with philosophy, since this is the only academic discipline of real great interest to me. I understand that mathematics or game theory can appeal to someone but for my preferences this isn't true.