Resolved: If a tree falls in the forest and no animal is there to hear it, it does make a sound.

Thank you for accepting Logical, always a pleasure to debate with you. I suppose I will quote you and attack specific points and then create a conclusion. "Ladies and gentleman, there is quite an ENORMOUS hidden assumption being made in this claim. That assumption is this: That existence is as we perceive it to be; my opponent is advocating that reality exist as we perceive it to be." >>Am I? And even if I am, does it matter that I am arguing reality is a we perceive it to be? In the perceptual reality of humans the tree falls in the forest and makes a sound. I am not the one assuming things here, it would be you assuming that I am arguing existence as we perceive it and it is by this point that you will lose. "Well since that is the case, I challenge him to prove it." >>To prove that reality exists as we perceive it to? First off, this would be your assumption so I challenge you to prove that it doesn't. Secondly your argument moots the point of debate. If we cannot debate a topic from human perception what perception can we then debate a topic from? "As the pro, it is his job to present conclusive evidence that reality is as we perceives it to be; that we aren't merely dreaming, that we aren't merely ideas of something greater, that what we know to be "true" is all a ruse (The Matrix), etc." >>Once again your argument moots the point of all debate. And also once again this is your point is it not? If you cannot provide conclusive evidence and neither than I then we are going to be forced to consider this point a wash. Have anything for me? "With this being known, he cannot even authoritatively state that the concept of sound exist (which is yet again an assumption in his resolution)." >>This is where you are wrong. My resolution makes no assumption that sound exists what-so-ever. You are the one pulling the assumption that sound even exists. But sound as we know it does exist and thats what matters. We are debating this entire resolution from a human perspective. This entire site is from a human perspective. The entire world as you, I, and every other person knows it is from a human perspective. Thus we have to evaluate this resolution from a human perspective, up until the point where you can prove to me that the world is not as we see it. At which point I will lay down my debating skills a bow to you as a god. Conclusion: In our world, as we know it, sound occurs. Sound is, simply put, on a scientific level a transfer of energy. As we know it mass and energy cannot be destroyed thus the energy occurring through the falling of the tree that produces sound can be tracked for an eternity ideally. My opponent brings up such ideas as us being in the Matrix. However his allusions to Plato's Cave serve no purpose in this debate as from either point of view I will win this round. Here are the two scenario's outlined. Scenario 1: Human perspective, the one which we evaluate everything from. Yes sound obviously exists under this perspective. Scenario 2: Plato's cave, the Matrix etc.... First off we have the inherent flaw, being we can't ever actually know. Secondly however even if everything that is happening is utterly fake it still must be caused by something. Lets go with the Matrix example. In the Matrix example a computer hits a button to cause a tree to fall which makes us perceive a sound (which is actually a couple computer programs running). This only serves to re-define sound, not to discredit its existence. Instead of sound being a transfer of energy it would now be defined as a couple computer programs. Definitions change as people become more knowledgeable about the world. If ever we find out that we are truly living in the Matrix then our definitions for "sound" and numerous other things will change. Example of when definitions have changed: The sun started as a god, became with time a random body that orbited our earth. Then we figured out it was actually our earth orbiting it, thus it became the center of the solar system. Then we decided it was a large mass of hydrogen, helium and oxygen, and only one of many stars. Finding out that we lived in the Matrix would change the Sun's definition yet again. It would not somehow destroy the suns existence though. Thus the sun exists in either scenario as does sound. Your turn =)