@debatedoubles7058: In a viral panel discussion, conservative commentator Charlie Kirk presses a fellow participant to provide an objective definition of the term "woman" without relying on circular reasoning. While the panelist argues that a woman is defined entirely by self-identification, Kirk contends that defining an entity by referencing itself lacks logical foundation—comparing it to defining an object or animal solely by its own name. Watch the persistent philosophical debate over language, gender identity, and objective definitions, and share your perspective in the comments below! #CharlieKirk #WhatIsAWoman #GenderDebate #CircularReasoning #Logic #DebateTok #Philosophy #CulturalDebate #FreeSpeech #PoliticalDebate #CurrentEvents #ViralClips #FYP #ForYouPage

Joselpato :

eye contact is alergic to bro

Ryan :

Well he never got an answer.

Error404 & Mac House Beats :

opinions start with "I think". definitions don't start with "I think", because definitions are definitive.

RisenDemons :

He never understood that social constructs do not have definitive definitions. The answer varies person to person for example I believe a woman is somebody who's responsibility is to bear a child while somebody else could say anything else.

wolfzehn :

These people are crazy

jbt5892 :

When your answer starts with "I think...." it's not a definition.

Tim Williams620 :

yeah that's great and all but I have a question what the hell are you looking at

kcismej :

Every single word in the English language has a definition.

Aaron :

Im a raptor

LaBruhh :

what is a table ?? it could be alot to some a cardboard box

joshjim59 :

im a T-rex

Doc.holiday44 :

We live in a twilight zone

Shane0119 :

There’s something wrong with the person when they won’t look at you when they’re talking… but they will dead ass stare at you when you’re talking. 🤨 Suspect

VIDFREAK727 :

No, that’s not how definitions work

AwpWilliams♥️ :

That definition doesn't work because of how definitions work. If a word you're looking up the definition for contains the word in the definition, you don't have any more information than you started with. So if a woman is someone who identifies themselves as a woman, then they are a person who identifies themselves as a person who identifies themselves, as a person who identifies themselves, as a person who identifies themselves... repeating.

_fidelcastro_1 :

Am indemnifying like a super sayian

fenixdragon82 :

No one you’ll ask this question to honestly answer it correctly. They will always come up with some excuse or talk about some other subject. They can’t just simply answer the question.

𝕏𝕩𝕃𝕚𝕢𝕦𝕚𝕕𝕚𝕥𝕪𝕩𝕏 :

it's like saying the answer is the answer, hes using the word to define the word but that doesn't answer what it is

Persisten/C :

hahahahaha

banana q :

I’m a billionaire…

🐦‍🔥Slade🐦‍🔥 :

what he is asking is what would be written in a dictionary so we don't lose eachother in translation... if what you say means something completely different to what others interpret them as than nobody will be able to hold a conversation. If I were to say "hey grab my keys so we can go to the store please. " and you grab me a damn chicken and you reason behind it is "Keys" to you actually means "Chicken" than that's not on the person asking for the damn keys.

AirForceGreg :

So weird

comedy slap :

it just doesn't affect much of the population is all roughly 1 two percent or so

Severiano Medina :

im a billionaire.

T-TIME 🤜🏼✌🏼🤛🏼 :