If Logical-Master answers all of his opponent's questions, he probably won't contradict himself

[quote]Like I said:In terms of what it seems we are talking about. We are talking about the matter of personal identity and I've claimed that it is constantly being replaced. Thus, to answer my opponent's question in that light, no as this vessel's personal identity is not the one it had at the previous instance in time. In fact, looking at it from that light, having a different personal identity each time "time itself" moves forward would render it impossible for there to be a contradiction as it would be the different personal identity which simply possesses an idea or experience different from the previous personal identity.[/quote] So, you're saying the vessel (body?) is not the person. [quote]Now, ignoring that light (as in we are considering the vessel known as Logical-Master), there is no different person (or rather vessel)."[/quote] So, you're saying the vessel (body?) is the person, as saying "or rather vessel" implies the two are the same existent, one is just a more apt description. I think the contradiction in that is clear. The vessel is the person Logical Master. The vessel is not the person Logical Master. Even if one holds my interpretation of the rhetorical device "Or rather" is unfair, which I don't think it is (indeed, I think it quite IMPROBABLE), discarding that (the only assailable premise, that he said the vessel is the person logical master, he was eminently clearer when he said it was not), would lead to the notion that the person who was Logical Master, who promised to answer all my questions and declared he would lose this debate if he failed to do so, ceased answering them the moment he finished making that statement, as the identity of the person within the vessel is "being replaced constantly," i.e., each round I've been talking to a different person. So take it either way, as a contradiction or violation of rule 1. [quote]My answer is no: Humanity if capable of perceiving many shades. I am capable (as in, it is possible) of perceiving other shades as well. It's just that I perceive the world as gray at this particular point in time based on prior experiences.[/quote] OIC, Logical Master is deriving a statement about the world being but one shade based on that being a shade he "perceives", when he already admits that other "perceptions" are available to (presumably). This second statement contradicts the minor premise of his argument from the world being that shade (2 in the following: 1. I perceive the world to be an exuberant shade of gray. 2. My perception about the world's shade is accurate. 3. The world is an exuberant shade of gray.) I'm not sure what he means by "perception" in this instance, it doesn't seem to go too well with the usual instance, but it doesn't matter, it appears to be consistent throughout and that is plenty. [quote]As for the third question, my answer is yes, depending on what my opponent means by "separately"[/quote] E.g. for each listed manga series, not all the manga series in sum (Yu-gi-oh and Naruto not "one book," but Yu-gi-oh one book and Naruto one book). Though you appear to have avoided contradiction in this particular instance, I do wonder where these books are. [quote]Ah, I'm not sure what overarching principles it is derived from.[/quote] I must recommend in the future my opponent look into that question. It helps quite a bit in figuring out what parts of it make any sense. That is, assuming he doesn't up and vanish in a poof of identity crisis tomorrow, or next second, or whatever, and be replaced. [quote]Hmm. To be honest, I'd be lying if I said the answer to this question was true or false. Truth be told: I don't know the answer as I'm not quite sure what the statement is suggesting.[/quote] I am quite glad to see "Logical-Master" admit he either doesn't know that a given person of a group numbering 2 is one of the best two members of that group, since "best" is ordinal and no matter how you order 2 members of a group of 2 both will still be in the top 2, and so on and so forth for members of groups of 3 being one of the best 3-- or that he doesn't know what variables are. Incidentally, whatever Master level in logic is supposed to be, I think it quite probable that he just contradicted the evaluation he declared when he pronounced himself a "Master" of logic. Whether he thinks it obbligatory to be honest in naming oneself or not (apparently he doesn't), a dishonest statement is still a statement :). [quote]As has already been insisted, time moves forward, thus it is unreasonable to hold one to a statement which may have been made long in the past.[/quote] Maybe in normal context-- but for a debate about the resolution "Logical Master will not contradict himSELF?" Well, we discussed that bit at the beginning of the round. :). Nonetheless, going into any more of LM's past would bore me, so I'll let it hang at the contradictions, probably and definite, that I've described above.