azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: No Recognition of Gay Marriage

"kicking" are reflexes same as movement dome by kid without brain. so ""And sense its moving that indicates brain activity which is classified as thought."" is pure bullshit
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: ABORTION - 50 MILLION KILLED

In order to move your brain needs to send that messare to the muscles through the nerves thus it still indicates brain activity. Brain activity on a subconscious level is clasifyed as basic thought.
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: No Recognition of Gay Marriage

Dear redneck, higher cognitive functions (a.k.a thinking) are no present in fetus. Reflex is involuntary thing completely unrelated to thinking
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: ABORTION - 50 MILLION KILLED

Thinking just refers to brain function there are different levels of it. It goes from basic all the way to complex.
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: No Recognition of Gay Marriage

Thinking just refers to brain function there are different levels of it. It goes from basic all the way to complexwhy I have the feeling that you have no clue what are you talking about? :D
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: ABORTION - 50 MILLION KILLED

Because you have no clue what you are talking about. Look there is conscious and subconscious thought. Thought is simply your brain interpreting and reacting to data. When you are told something new you proses the information and form an opinion of it right? Well same with involuntary reactions. Lets say you touch scolding hot water, your nerves transmit the data to your brain which then processes the data and sends a message to your muscles to react. You see even though in the second situation your not actively engaged in thought about how hot the water is as you are about the new information in the first situation, the same process takes place. It's all thought.
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: No Recognition of Gay Marriage

You don't even know the difference between thought, sensing and reflex.
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: ABORTION - 50 MILLION KILLED

Reflex occurs as a result to subconscious thought. There really isn't much of a difference.
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: No Recognition of Gay Marriage

Crime's against humanity to me more speaks about the whole population from like age 5 and up. Killing a barely multicellular parasite that doesnt have any pain receptors or heartbeat or brain activity let alone a personality is really no great crime to me. Now denying fully developed people who are just the same as everybody else the right they deserve that would make them happy simply because religion says its a no-no is a fucking crime. Its stupid and beneign just like the pro-life and mens rights movements.These are my opinions of course
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: No Recognition of Gay Marriage

Abortion is not crime same as removing tumor is not crime .
Debate: Which is the Greater (bigger) Crime Against Hummanity?
Side: No Recognition of Gay Marriage

This is a bullshit question in the first place, because none of the choices apply.But I find discrimination against human beings less aesthetically pleasing than not allowing an unviable fetus to become self-aware.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

When it comes to numbers all you have to remember is;- Look after number one and be careful not to stand on number twos.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

There is only one number.The largest and the smallest number is "1"
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

Agreed Anonymous, ( is that your real name?,ha ), as any figure less than one becomes a fraction. An integral number, consisting of one or more units WITHOUT FRACTIONS. However, numbers can be increased into infinity.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

No.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

Their is a starting point but no end point. It starts at one and goes on forever!!!
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

You posted on the wrong side.What number is the starting point?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

I have officialy changed my position after reading some of the above posts. The only real number is 1.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

You changed your answer to the dumbest available answer? Why? I have another number: 2. What's wrong with 2?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

No, i will tell you that 2 is just 1 and then another 1, only number is still 1
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Two is a separate entity from one. What about minus numbers? They're still numbers.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

They are the lack of quantity so can't be large or small and so are irrelevant to a debate about the largest number.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Not necessarily. Minus numbers can be quantitative in terms of circuitry, such as voltage and current. The largest number is never reachable as any number you state could just have another number added to it to make a bigger number.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

Using your logic ,Eventually numbers would become too long to state and you couldn't just add another. That would be the end.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

How can a number become too long? At what point does it go from long to too long? Of course you can just add a number on at the end. Just because it would be a number too incomprehensible for our minds, doesn't mean it couldn't exist.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

Here we have the real answer. We can't know if numbers have an end or don't have an end.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

There is no end to numbers. Take, for example, the size of the observable universe, which is about 96 billion light years in diameter (as it is considered a sphere) and turn that figure into nanometres: 908,210,726,868,419,947,319,797,905,096,704,000nm . It is a very big number indeed, however, you could always add on another '1' to the end of that number and it would be bigger, hence numbers have no end.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

So are you saying that you can see infinity? That's ludicrous.  Just because you see no end, doesn't mean there isn't one.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

No I didn't say that. Infinity isn't a number, it is a concept of something that is never ending. Take pi, it is a number with an infinite number of decimal places, which essentially makes it the biggest 'string' of numbers, however not the biggest number. The biggest number may very well be infinite, but then that agrees with my point that it is essentially endless.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

You lost me at "The biggest Number is infinite" You said before that "infinity isn't a number.You are deluded.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Infinity and infinite are different things. Infinite means something that never ends or seems to be endless. Infinity is a symbol used to conceptualise something that never ends. Infinity is not a number. When I said that the biggest number is 'infinite' I mean that it is bound to have no end, otherwise it wouldn't be the biggest number. You not being able to understand this isn't me being deluded.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

You say infinite is isnt measurable, so you to agree that we can't know if numbers end or go on forever. OK good bye.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Yeah that's what I was saying in the first place. Numbers don't have an end.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

That's not what I said. My argument is that you can't know if numbers have an end or not.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Why are you arguing with me over my concurrence with you?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

It's not actually concurrence if you've failed to understand the point.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Numbers don't have a beginning, so they don't have an end. What comes before 1? 0. What comes before 0? -1. What comes before that, and before that, and before that? There is always another number, so no beginning. Since there is no beginning there does not have to be an end.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

0 is nothing that means -1 is also nothing. That which has no quantity, can not be large or small. 1 is the beginning of quantity which means there is a beginning to numbers. Checkmate, Atheist.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Are you saying someone who is in debt $2000 owes as much as the person who is in debt $20? Numbers don't have to represent your skewed idea of quantity to be considered smaller.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

What I'm saying is anything 0 or below 0, has no quantity. Those numbers,"20" and "2000" are above 0. Get that into your noggin, Atheist.Those people owe 2000 and 20 dollars not negative 2000 and 20 dollars.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Those people have -$20 and -$2000 as their wealth. So, what do you think is the largest number?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

There's no such thing as negative money but if there was then that would mean that any money they obtained would literally vanish as soon as they got it until their debt was paid.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

What is the largest number?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

That isn't a counter to my argument, you must have realized the idiocy of your arguments. I was never supporting that a largest number does exist or doesn't exist, but was simply pointing out the error in your reasoning.This is over.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

It was over before you started. You not knowing how numbers work was never a good argument to begin with.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

L to the O to the L. You act tough, yet you couldn't even defend your argument any further. Get real. I see why you're called Cartman. It's because you're always losing fights and have to be carted to the emergency room.Hah. Cartman.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

"1v1 me irl bro".
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

I love verbal sparring as well as physical sparring, but I take it that you aren't serious. Pity how the internet makes people want to act like something they aren't.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Wow, I should have added an inb4 because that would have been absolutely perfect.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

That wouldn't have made any sense. The absence of a sense is perfect to you? That explains your consistent spouting of incoherence.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

So, you are saying you aren't a moron, the internet is just making you act that way?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

I'm saying that he and you need to stop acting tough because we all know that both of you are actually pathetic.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

It is really weird to hear the pathetic guy on the website who is acting tough tell me that I am pathetic and acting tough. Next thing you will accuse me of is creating my account based off someone else's account.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

It's really weird that you've been carted to the emergency room so many times and still believe that you don't have severe brain damage.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

You act tough, yet you couldn't even defend your argument any further.Yes, it is impossible to defend an argument that wasn't attacked at all.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

That is true but you did try to defend your argument which is obvious.You appear to be in denial.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

No, I was trying to explain to a complete moron how his entire premise was completely ridiculous.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

And then was defeated by said moron, that makes you even more of a moron.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

So, you don't know how numbers work or what the word defeat means. Got it.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

If that was true then you would have countered my argument, but instead you forfeited your reasoning and used a red herring. As a matter of fact, because of your use of a red herring, it makes it more likely that you don't understand how numbers work and don't understand the term 'defeat'. My argument is still open for dispute if you actually wish to continue with something relevant.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

If that was true then you would have countered my argument, but instead you forfeited your reasoning and used a red herring.No, like I said. If your argument is not based on reality there is no counter for it.As a matter of fact, because of your use of a red herring, it makes it more likely that you don't understand how numbers work and don't understand the term 'defeat'.You don't know how debt works. My argument is still open for dispute if you actually wish to continue with something relevant.It is not open for dispute because it is not a true statement.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

, like I said. If your argument is not based on reality there is no counter for it.It is based on reality, prove it isn't. Oh let me guess, you don't feel like it.You don't know how debt works.You owe someone money. Still isn't negative money, moron. No such thing.It is not open for dispute because it is not a true statement.You used a red herring thus aborting your attempt to prove that it isn't a true statement. You just love ignoring the situation and resorting to this BS. Get back to the original debate or just shut the fuck up bitch. You aren't accomplishing anything but making yourself a fool.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

It is based on reality, prove it isn't. Oh let me guess, you don't feel like it.I don't feel like doing it again you mean.You owe someone money. Still isn't negative money, moron. No such thing.It is. How about negative yards in football? If you run for negative yards do you have to go further on the next play to get a first down?You used a red herring thus aborting your attempt to prove that it isn't a true statement.I gave you a proper example. Just because you think it is a red herring doesn't make it so.You just love ignoring the situation and resorting to this BS.More projection.Get back to the original debate or just shut the fuck up bitch.I tried to and you claimed it had nothing to do with the debate. You aren't accomplishing anything but making yourself a fool.Which one of is denying negative numbers?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

I don't feel like doing it again you meanBut you said that "an argument that isn't based on reality has no counter". Showing that it isn't based on reality is a counter for it. But since you've technically admitted that you didn't provide a counter for it, then you never really did prove that it wasn't based on reality.It is. How about negative yards in football? If you run for negative yards do you have to go further on the next play to get a first down?Even if you call it -20 yards, it's still actually 20 yards.I gave you a proper example. Just because you think it is a red herring doesn't make it so.We were discussing whether negative numbers actually have quantity or not then you asked me "what is the largest number? Asking me that is the red herring.I tried to and you claimed it had nothing to do with the debate.Bulldip.Which one of is denying negative numbers?Neither of us.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Showing that it isn't based on reality is a counter for it.Um, yeah. But when the idiot you are talking to doesn't get it he will call it a red herring.But since you've technically admitted that you didn't provide a counter for it, then you never really did prove that it wasn't based on reality.Actually, technically I did by adding the word again.Even if you call it -20 yards, it's still actually 20 yards.Nope. That's why we have negative numbers. If it were still 20 yards, you could get a first down by running in the wrong direction. We were discussing whether negative numbers actually have quantity or not then you asked me "what is the largest number? Asking me that is the red herring.No, that is literally the debate question.Bulldip.No, bulldip is calling the debate question a red herring.Neither of us.You are half right. Which is about half more than usual.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

Um, yeah. But when the idiot you are talking to doesn't get it he will call it a red herring.More Projection.Actually, technically I did by adding the word againSo you admit that you didn't prove that my argument is based on reality. Gotcha.Nope. That's why we have negative numbers. If it were still 20 yards, you could get a first down by running in the wrong directionWhat's why we have negative numbers? What is this "first down"? And why is it the "wrong direction"? Answer the questions? No red herrings.No, that is literally the debate questionThe issue at hand wasn't the debate question, the issue at hand was your reasoning that you used to answer the debate question. Therefore red herring.No, bulldip is calling the debate question a red herring.Your use of it as an argument, is the red herring. You are half right. Which is about half more than usual.75% of the time. I'll wear that with pride.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

You don't understand how anything in the real world works. There is no way to explain to you how the real world works if that is the case. Enjoy your imagination.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

What logically follows from that response, is that there is no way to explain anything to anyone who doesn't have the understanding already. Which is clearly false, based on the fact that we have many mentors for many different subjects which have successfully educated many people, by explaining something to the people that they had not had the understanding of beforehand.Ad hominems only show how battered and wounded you are from a loss that was inevitable.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

It isn't an ad hominem, it's just plain truth. You don't know reality, so I can't explain to you how you are wrong.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

That is a non sequitur. Ad hominems and truth are not mutually exclusive.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

I am not insulting you though.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

Ad hominem is not only in the form of an insult, it is any irrelevant response which is directed at the person's character rather than their argument. You could be giving the person a compliment in response to their argument and it would still be an ad hominem.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

It is not directed at your character, it is directed at your abilities. You have no character. There is nothing I can do to help you. You claim that negative numbers have no quantity, but when I give you examples you claim that they have a quantity. You can't be reasoned with.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

Any abilities the person possesses, is a part of their character.You used debt as an example. I agreed that negative numbers can represent debt, but then argued that one can not actually have negative money.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

You used debt as an example. I agreed that negative numbers can represent debt, but then argued that one can not actually have negative money.One man has $100 in debt. He makes $1000. He pays off his debt. He has $900. Another man has $0 in debt. He makes $1000. He has $1000. If you can't have negative money, how does the second guy end up with more money?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

He ends up with more money because he didn't volunteer away 100$ dollars.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

Good point.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

That's exactly what I was going to say! But it brings me to the question: then if numbers don't have beginning or end, do they actually exist?
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Numbers exist as a concept. They have never really been described as anything but a concept.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

What number set are you talking about? The natural numbers? I believe you meant the natural numbers, {0,1,2,3, ...}. For the sake of argument, lets assume that the natural numbers don't go on forever. Then there must be some largest number, n. But then n + 1 is a larger number, and n therefore can't be the largest number. This contradicts the assumption that the natural numbers don't go on forever, and no number can thus be the largest Q.E.D.Side note, there exists finite number sets with a unique largest number.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers have an end!!

You said that natural numbers dont go on forever, so by the terms of your own argument, n can't be +1. Pretty dumb argument, from you.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

i will add 1 to your 1.there is another interpretation of numbers where 0 is the largest, and any number, such as 1, is 0 with its negative counterpart subtracted from it 1 = 0 - -1. here, 0 is all numbers.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

As we know Numbers don't have a starting point, so they don't have an ending point . No One can Tell what comes before 1? 0. What comes before 0? -1. What comes before that, and before that, and before that? There is always another number, so no beginning. Since there is no beginning there does not have to be an end.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Dang, you sound really smart.
Debate: Which is the largest number?
Side: numbers doesn't have an end!!

Something important a teacher told me about numbers: Numbers are made the way we define them. Why wasn't 2 our 1? Because, we defined it that way. So, you CAN create a set of numbers (i.e integers b/w -3 and 3) that would have an end, but the way the number system is currently defined is that the number line goes on to infinity.