Philosophy Debate Topics

2,288 debate topics, all ages. Debatable motions with arguments for and against. Open the arguments below, pick one at random, or present them full-screen.

All agesDebatePage 1 of 46

1.
Philosophy offers little real wisdom
For
I forfeit.
It is an interesting argument, but it forgets the fact that philosophy has never benefited of anything. Philosophy are never the reality but the opinion of a boring man, my proofs are Alan Watts was nothing but a man writing a diary about his views on Zen Buddhism and he is…
Against
#win
Win!
2.
Humans are morally superior to animals
For
My opponent clearly doesn't understand what the term "destroyed" refers to when he uses it. In the context "humans have destroyed the world" he overlooks that in this situation there is a beneficiary. Therefore, it depends on the perspective. If I cut down 100 trees in order to…
Sorry for late delivery of this argument: I flew to New York to visit family during Christmas. To correct my opponents reasoning, "humans' advanced thinking does not benefit the common good." Whether humans' ability to think clearly and rationally is objectively great, there is…
Against
"If I cut down 100 trees in order to build a farm that feeds a small town, is it destruction?" The answer, in fact, is yes. The "innovators" such as my opponent ignore the fact that other living beings exist. 100 trees could house millions of different life forms! If genocide…
My opponent started off by refuting my point that humans' advanced thinking does not benefit the common good. However, this argument still stands. According to him, if we are doing good for the short term life of our country, we are doing good for the world. This is the kind of…
3.
A purpose for morality implies that ends-based ethics is correct
For
The reasons a purpose to morality implies an ends-based system is relatively simple. If there is a goal for morality, then morality exists to achieve this goal. This means that what is moral is determined by whether or not it improves progress towards this goal. As such, what…
I will allow my opponent to make the first argument.
Against
The purpose of morality being human benefit, this is a goal achieved through both means and ends. It is a goal perpetuated by the existence of humanity, for as long as there are people, they will seek benefit. Morality does not end once the goal of human benefit is reached. As…
My opponent makes a positive statement, so the burden of proof lies with him. I will do what I can for now. Morality has always had a purpose, and that is collective and/or individual benefit. Humans, being social animals and in living groups, developed desirable conduct for…
4.
Nothing is inherently a waste of time
For
//We are restarting this debate. VanillaisLove forfeited last time due to other commitments but is kind enough to agree to restart. We will just copy paste the arguments already delivered and then continue from there. // This is a short debate. You only have 24 hours to respond…
Con attacks me by saying that I have narrowed this debate down to only hobbies. I admit that I did not define the topic but to be fair, in a short debate like this we should use the "most reasonable definition". I have already alluded in my Round 2 arguments that "nothing" here…
Against
Pro's logic is quite frustrating. They haven't clearly explained a few things, which I will point out in my following arguments. First off, they have not established which actions fall under the category of "nothing". Would everything count as not being a waste of time, as long…
Thanks for letting me retake it without being offended or getting mad at me for exceeding the time limit. Good luck, again. Hello, I accept your debate. I am for Con, and will therefore be arguing against the notion that nothing is inherently a waste of time.
5.
Environment influences human choices more than free will
For
You have made some really good points, but let me remind you that a majority of people born in horrible backgrounds (environments) tend to stay in that environment. But since you claim I am not a religious man, I ask you how does God enforce his Commandments? The answer is…
But I read your statement and you stated that " The environment does not force you to make a choice". I completely agree, that is why I have stated that the Environment INFLUENCES a person's choice more than free will. Now the Starving man example is extreme, so I will give an…
Against
Pardon me, I forgot you were a Deist. I apologize. To rebute what you said about God being a God of fear, you have to remember one thing, He doesn't rule by fear. He believes in a relationship based on trust. When you betray God, it's very hard to forgive that (it's not…
Thank you too. But I would like to say this. Did you believe that "temptation" and "desire" are the same? If so, then that's incorrect. Temptation and desire are not the same. Ever heard the saying, "He that looketh at another woman lustfully is already committing adultery in…
6.
Humans should pursue answers to life's big questions
For
Let's save my elaboration about creators and such for another time. I would say that it deserves its own debate. You keep reiterating things about "natural processes." By nature, *meant* to occur. My contention was not that being alive gives people meaning. Human purpose is…
Thank you Kinesis, my next debate topic is resurrection :) Note: I am not saying that humans are to achieve correct answers, but that they instinctively; and therefore are meant to, try to achieve answers the best they can. Kinesis said that "humans are not *meant* for…
Against
Thanks to Shakespeare for the debate! I shall present by final round as a list of counterpoints; 'Let's save my elaboration about creators and such for another time. I would say that it deserves its own debate' --> Very well. I think you have given up your only chance of…
------------- My Position ------------- First, allow me to clarify my position. What I mean when I say that we simply *are*, is not that humanity as a whole is not going anywhere, not that human knowledge is not increasing or that we do not create and achieve goals. Indeed, it…
7.
The physical world is most likely fundamentally mental
For
Well, it seems as if my opponent forfeited. Anyway, We have good reasons to believe that integrated information complex is consciousness[http://www.biolbull.org...], and at the very least a complex integrated information system at a maxima is an identifier of it. How does this…
My opponent forfeited.
Against
What you speak of, sounds to be akin to Metaphysics. Which if we're going to debate in a whole, we should ensure first, we know the Etymology of the word. Meta, being Greek for " Beyond " and "Physics" Which is where I take a Con position to you, because nothing can be ' beyond…
8.
Silence is more valuable than speech
For
My opponent speaks too much... Silence is golden
Shhhh...................
Against
This isn't even a debate. I will speak very little then.
All my opponent has to say is "Shhhh. .. .. .. .. .. .. ." Alright then?
9.
Categorical imperatives can be known to exist
For
Defense: rehashing of the defense of premise 2: let X be a world with categorical imperative C. let Y be a world with categorical imperative not-C. Let Z be a world without categorical imperatives. C states that one ought to do action 'a'. (C <=>0a) not-c states that one ought…
it is a shame that my opponent forfeited the previous round. I hope he returns. as my previous argument was rather long winded, (I nearly hit the character limit) I will not provide any further arguments until my opponent returns.
Against
Pro has once again failed to demonstrate the truth of his 2nd premise. Pro made the claim that, "a world with categorical imperatives and a world without categorical imperatives are indistinguishable from one another."Pro has failed to provide any supporting evidence for this…
I'm excited to see where this debate takes us. I accept all your definitions and would like to add two of my own:Def 1 - Possible: Something that can happen. Having precedent or parallel comparison. Def 2 - Not Possible: Not able to be, exist, or happen. Also in regards to the…
10.
Hume's argument against miracles fails
For
I hope to have an enlightening discussion. If you take up this debate I'm intending that you begin with opening remarks and a stating of Hume's position. I think this will serve us better rather than my own attempt to state it in case you would like to present it somewhat…
Without anything to respond to it kind of takes the fun out of it. Maybe we can redo this sometime in the future.
Against
I really, really hate to do this, but I am not going to argue in this round. As it is round 3 and we are still setting definitions, there is just no point. This is my fault, as if I wouldn't have forfeited round 2, this would not be a problem. You deserve to win this debate, if…
After wrapping up my first debate, I was searching my mind for a perfect topic to propose. My mind fell blank. Fortunately, you came up with the debate I would have proposed if I would have proposed the perfect debate. So thanks, good luck, and let's do this. As the opening…
11.
The arts have value in and of themselves
For
Thank you Dear Opponent for proposing this lively debate. Just to make sure our base of understanding is solid and consistent, a couple things I want to clear up: A more complete list of the arts: painting, music, theater, movies, sculpture, modern art, TV, fashion *as well as*…
I am kind of confused as to whether I am supposed to proceed or not.. It sounds like you're done with this, yet you presented a series of arguments before forfeiting. Anyways, I was never trying to upset you, but it seems I did regardless. Given your forfeit, rather than use…
Against
I will be arguing that the Arts have no Value. My argument will center around that "the arts" are not a goal. They may help certain people in their quest for a desired goal, but are not necessary. They are not a goal that would allow sacrifice of more desirable things in order…
I wasn't talking about tempation in the way. I was saying temptation as in 'we can become tempted to be lazy.. to not reach our full potential because it's easier' That is a temptation. It's something that is appealling, and we have the capability of succombing to it despite…
12.
Theism is more plausible than naturalism
For
I'll begin by noting that Con has not made any arguments either for naturalism or against theism. While this would be fine within the framework of logical positivism or hard empiricism, it is not fine within the framework of reformed epistemology, which Con has not addressed.…
In this debate, I'm taking the Pro side in Devil's advocacy. Many of my fellow atheists disregard theism without adequately understanding it. This is a mistake. In recent times, brilliant minds have applied analytic philosophy to Christian theology, creating an incredibly…
Against
My opponent states that, "I'll begin by noting that Con has not made any arguments either for naturalism or against theism. " The onus is not upon me to do so, the resolution is "On balance, theism is more plausible than naturalism. " My opponent as instigator bears the burden…
Argument 1: The Cosmological argument My opponent presents the following argument. "(1) Every contingent fact has an explanation. (2) There is a contingent fact that includes all other contingent facts. (3) Therefore, there is an explanation of this fact. (4) This explanation…
13.
Humans are inherently monstrous and must fear themselves
For
I am glad you bring up the tension from the Police Brutality cases... You make a very good case... congrats!Are either exclusively wrong... no...well unless you ask them... But essientially we cannot make up for our wrongs and we never have, the media will always depict…
A monster is as defined by googlemon·ster /G2;mänstər/nounnoun: monster; plural noun: monsters1. an imaginary creature that is typically large, ugly, and frightening.and naturalnat·u·ral /G2;naCH(ə)rəl/adjectiveadjective: natural1. existing in or caused by nature; not made or…
Against
I am arguing that monsters are only through a misunderstanding of other cultures, that the more we understand the further it appears that monsters turn on out to be that, and that naturally in a species like ours. Where communication and working together is natural, that…
First may I say, very interesting argument topic and I look forward to this debate. With that being said, I bring to you the idea that a monster is in the eye of the beholder, and the definition of monster is usually dictated by history, and that we as a society have become…
14.
Free will probably exists in humans
For
CON is right, free will doesn't exist. And yet it does exist. How can that be? I'll summarize. I have demonstrated that the very idea of a "free" agent is self-contradictory. You have to wonder though, why would so much of our everyday reasoning be based on the assumption that…
Just to clear up any confusion, I do consider humor, intelligence, and compassion to be "real". However, they are labels in that the concepts describe particular patterns we observe in humans. A pattern only exists in the sense that it is recognized by an intelligent agent.…
Against
^o^ There are many contradictions in your case. So many that your arguments.... are practically my arguments. "Whether free will exists depends on your precise definition of it. My has given his: A decision is free if and only if there are no outside forces influencing the…
Very, very, clever post by my opponent. ;) To rebut your case (atleast the most important part): "My stance is that "free will" is a label that we assign to the behavior of rational agents. It "exists" in the same sense that humor, intelligence or compassion "exists". They are…
15.
Victory breeds hatred because the conquered are never happy
For
I am more inclined to believe Buddha tha some random internet debater". You have no proof that conquored people can be happy. People cannot be happy without their liberty.
You have the right to your opinion. You have obviously had a good life, so what would you know? I have been conquored may times, and I was not happy.
Against
Okay. Assuming you're right about the fact that the conquered don't have liberty, people without liberty can still be happy. For example, let's say someone is in prison, and has therefore lost their liberty. Then they realize that their best friend is in the cell right next to…
First of all, you don't know whether I have a good life, so I will disregard that comment. Secondly, I proved that it is possible to be conquered and happy, not that the conquered are always happy. So you might have been conquered a billion times and never been happy about it,…
16.
There is absolute truth
For
There is absolute truth. Not everything is a matter of perspective. In order for you to say or be anything, even to criticise you must exist. If you don't exist, you cant do any of these things. Therefore existence is a fundamental truth. With that fundamental truth comes the…
The Fool: For the absolute sceptic is often called the global sceptic, this is a position a philosopher makes up as a rival for whom he must test his claims against to see if they pass. But one thing I should make clear is to mention that not all philosophers are philosophers.…
Against
There are not absolute truths."Absolute truth" is defined as inflexible reality: fixed, invariable, unalterable facts.Because you exist, that does not mean that existance isn't a matter of perspective. The perception of my existances, does not prove that I know the absolute…
Like I said.
17.
The modal ontological argument is not sound
For
I would first like to begin by thanking my opponent for this swift and stimulating debate on an admittedly unique argument for God's existence. On the points of argument though, it appears my opponent still does not fully grasp my point. My opponent argues that my point is…
My opponent's rebuttal against my argument can be summed up basically as follows: He argues that P2 is incoherent in that it doesn't make sense to say we can imagine a world in which a being who must exist in all possible worlds does not exist. This is because it necessarily…
Against
I would like to express my gratitude one last time to both socialpinko and Phantom for this lively discussion.It's not that I misunderstand Pro's point or even his intent. The problem is that he is using something he thinks is modal logic, but in the end turns out to be…
I thank socialpinko for his analysis of my last round, but I'm afraid his latest rebuttal doesn't actually make his Round 2 argument any less of a logical contradiction.All I did was take Pro's own definition of a maximally great being (one that exists necessarily) and show how…
18.
Free will does not exist and is an illusion
For
Your definition of free will creates a harsh dualism between fate or things that are 'supposed' to happen vs. things happening out of one discretion or there psychological natural. Both discretion and fate are linked based off decisions someone "makes". These decisions are not…
Free will, as in the definition given, is the ability of agents to make choices unconstrained by certain factors. This idea is flawed because all agents themselves are constrained by at least the known forces of physics. In physics, for every action there is a reaction. We call…
Against
Yes that definition does create a harsh dualism between fate and choice. Looking at that statement in a different way, you can see that choices govern fate not fate govern choice, but if you choose to believe that fate dictates your choices then any and every opportunity that…
Let"s start off by asking what is free will Free will the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion. -https://www.google.com... Ok let"s see what is discretion Discretion the quality of behaving or speaking in such a…
19.
We cannot be certain an external world exists beyond perception
For
My opponent forfeited the last round. All arguments extended..
The question should pertain to a standard of knowledge. This could be either a priori knowledge, a posteriori knowledge ect...
Against
What is your standard of truth?
Are you saying we can't know anything for sure since it's all subjective? Also if you are saying that you are only limited to your own perception, how would you know that since you cannot transcend your own perception? And if you are only limited to your own perception how can…
20.
Survival of the fittest should not override unalienable rights
For
Thank you Con for the overview on "survival of the fittest."The Life of the scientific community, has the freedom ("Liberty") in research, via the scientific method during its evolutional process, in the pursuit of the objective to better understand the Laws of Nature, and once…
Hello debatergorl (Con), and thank you for joining me (Pro) on an evolutionary journey on evolution. At least, I would like to think so, for the sake of those in the field of education inspiring future generations.Imagine, what the world would be like today, if that popular…
Against
"The Life of the scientific community, has the freedom ("Liberty") in research, via the scientific method during its evolutional process, in the pursuit of the objective to better understand the Laws of Nature, and once accomplished, there is positive-feedback for the world…
My opponent has made an interesting argument, but I will refrain from directly rebutting to his arguments in this round until after I have stated my opening case.First of all, I think my opponent has misunderstood his own prompt. Let's take a closer look at it, shall we?"In…
21.
There is no objective reality
For
Note to all: While it is true that I label myself as a solipsist, that is not the true definition of what I believe. I agree with solipsism that the self is the only thing you can know for sure is real, but I do not agree that the self is the ONLY thing that exists in the…
I will start. There is no objective reality. There is no WAY of proving there is an objective reality. Con will provide arguements to say that there is an objective reality. Burden of proof is on me to show that the arguements don't hold and don't prove anything.Resoltuion:…
Against
I'm sorry for wasting time for you debate, but I have made an important decision. I hereby declare that I will not participate in this debate or any other debate because of the effects I have been experiencing over the past couple of weeks. Due to my constant attendance in the…
I accept. Since I am taking the place as Con, I will be arguing that Solipsism is wrong and there can be an objective reality. Before I begin, if anyone doesn't know what Solipsism is, Solipsism "is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist."…
22.
Dying for freedom is better than living in captivity
For
1. The Afterlife I will agree with my opponent that you will get to the afterlife regardless of when you die. 2. Life in captivity may not be negative This is an absurd comment by my opponent. The 100,000 slaves who were successful in fleeing from the Southern States from…
My opponent states "if you are dead you will enjoy nothing. " First of all my opponent, mathematically, sets the enjoyment in death at 0 or nothing. Therefore, my opponent must be assuming there is no afterlife. Though this is an entirely different channel to this debate, I…
Against
I will make my conclusion brief: My opponent states examples of times where slaves did whatever they could to get away from slavery. Not all cases are like this. During the roman era which lasted over 1100 years it was considered good to treat a slave well[1] although this was…
My opponent mentions the afterlife in his argument. First of all you will get to the afterlife regardless of whether or not you die trying to be free becausee you will die anyway and it will not necessarily be good. My opponent assumes that life in captivity will be negative.…
23.
A world without negative actions would negate positive ones
For
Obviously there are other reasons as to why people do things. But i'm saying if whatever reason they did it ie to get in shape, release energy, save money cos it made them happy etc...what if all of the reasons why they did this to avoid negative results never happened. i.e you…
First off, this is my first debate so just want to say thanks to the creators of this site. Ok, I read another debate on here asking a similar question and the winning argument was basically "There are different levels of happiness, so someone can always be happy and content…
Against
[3] "What if all of the reasons why they did this to avoid negative results never happened?" This is impossible to do because the emotion of boredom exists. Boredom is a negative that people will avoid. In a perfect world without negatives, boredom and negative emotions will…
This will also be my first debate as well. [1] "If it wasn't possible to fail a test, would a pass bring you happiness? " This will ultimately depend on the individual in question. Personally, if I passed a test that was so incredibly simple, I would feel prideful enjoyment as…
24.
Mathematics ultimately has no meaning
For
you say "They do not respond to my point about how Math is still useful even if I concede his point about his theorem. " just because it works has nothing to do with mathematics ending in meaninglessness dean notes "mathematics EVEN THOUGH IT WORKS- it is philosophically absurd…
you say "The idea that 1=.99999... [to infinity] is one put forth simply for ease of use and is indeed, a form of rounding. In reality, 1 =/= .9999 [to infinity] because we can comprehend .00001 [to infinity potentially] and deduct that from one thus giving us a number…
Against
My opponent...Parrots the same arguments with no added substance. Then he uses the work of a "dean", unsourced, that really adds nothing to the debate.In response to the dean's quote, I will say that just because we do not comprehend everything about math does not mean that it…
Opponents ArgumentMy opponent simply reiterates his original points with literally no rebuttal at all.They do not respond to my point about how Math is still useful even if I concede his point about his theorem. My Argument cont.My opponent asks for an example.Well if we take…
25.
Killing one innocent person to save many is morally permissible
For
I will tackle my opponent's argument in chunks for clarity. I will give the beginning and ending statements of each chunk in quotations and capital letters before my responses. Please reference my opponent's Round 1 speech in order to understand all argumentation. "R.A:…
Congratulations, TheLwerd, on making it this far in the tournament undefeated. Thank you, judges, for your analysis, and spectators, if there are any, for your interest. Now, without further ado, let's boogie: *** "I am for those means which will give the greatest good to the…
Against
Pro was unable to post his R3 argument in time; my arguments must therefore be extended, and the points that remain disproven from the Pro belong to me. In this final round, I will summarize/elaborate on some of my main arguments, and reaffirm why you should vote Con. -- TAKING…
1 - 4. Whether moral relativism (the notion that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances -- Wiki) exists is not debatable, though moral…
26.
Utilitarianism is in principle a better moral system
For
I have nothing to rebut.
You may have noticed that line at the beginning of R1 that I said I wanted to pick my opponent. Unfortunately, the first contender declined the debate, and while I was retracting my challenge, the requirements reset to default and the debate became acceptable by anyone again. I…
Against
I accept.
27.
Honesty is the best policy
For
lolwut
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM hm
Against
First, I think we should agree that honesty is defined as the whole truth and nothing else. We often use honesty as an excuse to hurt or harm someone. If we are always honest, it would be impossible to maintain and grow relationships with other people. We would use total and…
I'll be starting my debate with the argument being that honesty is not always the best policy. There is a time for honesty, and a time for you to lie. Also, just some information: This is my first debate on this website, so I'm probably not that good. Ground Rules: Round 1 will…
28.
Morality is arbitrary according to the Euthyphro dilemma
For
"1 God (the morality-giver) has knowledge, 2) God can rationalize, and 3) God uses logical, rational decisions based on the knowledge that he has. " I accept the above attributes.
The Euthyphro Dilemma raises the following questions: "Is what is morally good, morally good because god commands it?" or "Is it because it is morally good, god commands it?" The two questions raises a "Dilemma," in that in situation number one, where what is morally good is…
Against
Honestly, I was thinking about it and was excited just from that. So I wish you the best of luck. But before I begin, I take it we can both make these assumptions. 1) God (the morality-giver) has knowledge, 2) God can rationalize, and 3) God uses logical, rational decisions…
I'm just going to quote my opponent in a few places and show why I have won. I will not post any new arguments because my opponent will not have a chance to respond to them "...tells us that society has compromised their morality, it has changed, and it has evolved..."…
29.
Humans do not have free will
For
If that is what Con has chosen to do, then so be it. I thank him for the debate.
RESPONSE What Con has done in his rebuttal is present a straw man. Con states that I have presented my evidence as "scientific proof", which I have not done and do not plan to do. Con was likely referring to the evidence I used to back up my arguments. Evidence and proof are…
Against
I appreciate Pro's understanding of my lack of desire to continue this debate. If course I would expect one who believes I had no say in the choice I made to be accepting of it. My decision was, according to Pro, inevitable.
It is not my intent to forfeit a round and hang this debate and prevent voting for my opponent. I defer to my opponent to proceed to the next round. I have made the choice to cease the debate of my own free will.
30.
Time is not a fundamental feature of reality
For
Sorry for my terrible choice of wording, I'm not saying it isn't a real idea I'm saying it isn't an actual thing outside of an idea. People treat time like an object of the universe, when in reality it's just an idea made by man. You say it's globally excepted, but if it was a…
Time does not exist, it is an idea made by man to describe aging, and to keep track of records. If time existed we would be able to interact with it. The fact we cannot control or interact with time makes it a completely false thing.
Against
For the sake of completing the debate (I've begun 3 but can't seem to get a complete status) again I concede to my opponent in this debate.
Well this changes the scales drastically. I honestly cannot grasp what you might mean when you say that people treat time like an object of the universe. I don't think I've ever seen an example of that. You are in fact correct in that time is merely an idea and it is in fact…
31.
The Kalam cosmological argument is probably plausible
For
And we are off!
More filler.
Against
I don't think my opponent's link from the last round is working. The new debate is here: http://www.debate.org...
Just some filler.
32.
All knowledge is founded on faith
For
Once again, my arguments remain unanswered. I extend my arguments as is.
I shouldn't even dignify this with a response. *sigh* My opponent did not address my arguments, so I extend them as is.
Against
Techno Music!!!! http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com...
Just get to the point! You believe in a flying space alien who reads who your thoughts and wants you to worship him like a king. Here is an example of faith: In my garage their lives a 30000000 year old dinasour which can breath um fire out of its mouth You cant see it you cant…
33.
It is better to be feared than loved if one cannot be both
For
FINAL REBUTTALS AND CONCLUSION1. The MongolsActually, the Mongols just didn't know how to rule because they had no expereince. Do you expect nomads to know how to take care of a country? [1] Of course not. All the Mongols knew was how to conquer and shut down rebellions.…
REBUTTALS1. The Mongols Indeed, the empire did collapse, but keep in mind that the Mongols were really bad rulers. Their goal was pretty much just gold and loyalty. They even let the rulers keep their states and rule them as long as they paid gold to the Mongols. [1]2.…
Against
P1. The MongolsWhat would experience have taught them? That they needed to be loved. Whether your a government or an individual, it is always better to be loved. It doesn't follow that citizens who love their government enough would rebel. If the colonists had loved Great…
Thank you for your responses, Pro.P1. The MongolsThe Mongols were pretty terrible rulers. Why? Because feared rulers can only do so much. Fear of the government causes rebellion and uprising. There is no trust. No loyalty. That is why represenative forms of government are so…
34.
Humans cannot have knowledge of the supernatural
For
Courtesy is no problem. As my closing "argument", and in the troll spirit, I offer the best argument posted on a debate that I've ever seen. "u like your mommy(:" http://www.debate.org...
I second my opponents suggestion of shunning and wholeheartedly encourage all others to do the same.
Against
Perhaps insane, he triedTo bring Enkidu back to lifeTo end his bitterness,His fear of death.His life became a quesTo find the secret of eternal lifeWhich he might carry back to give to his friend.- Epic of Gilgamesh, tablet III.
Lacking an actual debate round to post here, may I instead draw your attention to these superb videos:. http://www.youtube.com...http://www.youtube.com...http://www.youtube.com...I
35.
Determinism and free will cannot both be true
For
As Nail_Bat forfeited this round there is no need to say anything more. Free will and determinism completely contradict each other and cannot be both true simultaneously.
I probably haven't emphasized myself enough, as it seems that my opponent keeps confusing between the existence of free will as an illusion and the existence of free will as a real property of a living creature. It is important to make it clear and understandable – both…
Against
My opponent has asked me to explain how free will and determinism can settle down without distorting their definitions. I however do not think the definitions of either term are clear cut. If we define determinism as "Bob would have inevitably taken the bus" and free will as…
In order to decide whether or not free will and determinism can put aside their differences and be friends, we have to figure out just what the heck they ARE. Every person who's started a similar topic has put forth their own definitions, and those definitions always fall…
36.
The argument from desire is a sound philosophical argument
For
I wih to thank Con, again, for taking the time to debate this with me.I would just like to add that I had put the desire in question into words in my opening argument, though it's possible I wasn't clear enough. From the opening argument, I stated, "The desires of this erth are…
I wish to thank mrsatan for his thought-provoking response.Premise 1: Every natural, innate desire in us corresponds to some real object that can satisfy that desire.Argument 1: The fact that the objects that exist to fulfill these desire exist only on Earth is actually…
Against
I apologize if my statement about the desires vagueness came off offensively. That was not my intention. More accurately, I simply found Pros later description to be much more clear than Peter Kreefts description. Also, I do not need to show any of the premises as untrue.…
I am, however, content to drop this point, as it was meant to be more of an observation than an actual argument. Also, as he has now put the desire in question into words, I have a better understanding of the Argument for Desire, and can now properly refute it. As stated: "Our…
37.
A maximally great being is possible
For
Con's First Glance"I'm dubious ... 'Most philosophers?' Hardly." What an odd doubt; nearly every philosopher agrees that necessary existence is either possible or impossible. Whereas contingent existence is either probable or improbable. This is one of the principles governing…
Most philosophers agree that if God's existence is possible, then he must exist. That is, God's existence is necessary, which is a property. A well known and well defended argument is below where steps 2-5 are uncontroversial. The key premise is 1.Plantinga's Argument 1. It is…
Against
Pro's First Equivocation: Pro claimed that most philosophers believe "God" is necessary. When I pointed out that that's hardly likely, Pro changed his claim to, "necessary existence is either possible or impossible," which is not the same claim at all. It's nothing like the…
Hey, Geo, thanks for this discussion. Most philosophers agree that if God's existence is possible, then he must exist. That is, God's existence is necessary, which is a property. I'm dubious. Why would anyone who wasn't committed to this particular transparently-false argument…
38.
The phrase equal opportunity refers to probability, not possibility
For
Con puts forward a good argument that shows why possibility should be accepted in the definition of Equal Opportunity (EO). However this debate is not about which word should be used in the definition the words individually, but rather what the phrase refers to.Take for…
Accept.
Against
I. Probability doesn't make sense The literal Definition of "Equal Opportunity" is having the same quantity of favorable circumstances to create a possibility. (n) measure, quantity, amount (how much there is or how many there are of something that you can quantify) [1] I will…
(adj) equal (having the same quantity, value, or measure as another) . http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...(n) opportunity (a possibility due to a favorable combination of circumstances). http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...This debate was started over a disagreement of the meaning…
39.
Morals are determined by external factors
For
Hi OlaNordmann. Thanks for accepting the debate. Lets analyse the four examples you gave of emotions. Fear. The younger we are, the more fearless we are. Children will climb trees, run into a busy street, play with snakes and spiders, etc. We are taught to fear things. Even the…
We are not born with any moral values. To a newborn there is no right or wrong. Every moral belief we have is the result of things we see and hear we can not alter those beliefs through will alone, although our beliefs can be altered by seeing or hearing something new.
Against
Fear. The younger we are, the more fearless we are. Children will climb trees, run into a busy street, play with snakes and spiders, etc. We are taught to fear things. Even the concept of death we learn to fear only because we see adults crying at a funeral and therefore…
Hey Furyan5, sorry for taking so long to respond.I think you raise a reasonable question, and I agree with your argument too a large extent. I would not dismiss that society and life experiences influence our sense of right and wrong. If you where to make the argument that if…
40.
Reality is a simulation
For
Assumption 1. It's possible to simulate consciousnessWhile it is not possible today, This assumption merely means that it is technologically possible. Modern AI can compose classical piano, Recognize faces, Diagnose medical disorders, Beat human professionals at complex games…
Hello Debate0ts, Welcome to the debate! Firstly, I am having difficulty understanding what you're saying. We can't have a proper argument if we can't understand each other! I'm guessing there's a language barrier. Please use the spelling/grammar checker, And try to format your…
Against
Might some day ur thinking come true. Theoretically it is, Still not possible to generate artificial consciousness. As scientifically the consciousness is it self a amount of sub consciousness and unconsciousness ( eg: dreaming ) But today we r still in search the reason for…
A great apology for my previous post U r right that, I get the wrong idea on ur topic And also u bit anaylize that there is small language gap between us. But I try my best to convey my thoughts. As per from ur 5 statements. My counter as follows, It is disfficult to stimulate…
41.
Human morality is universal
For
Forfeits are lame. I guess this debate will just be one round shorter.
I will first present my own case then proceed to attack my opponent's. Seeing as no definitions have been proposed thus far, i will give my own: Moral-of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong…
Against
I would like to begin by asking my opponent to "bear with me" as I try to familiarize myself with the methods of debating on this website. This is my first debate here, and in fact my first non-verbal debate ever. I would like to argue that morality is NOT universal but…
42.
Objectivism is a valid ethical system
For
Keep in mind that a value is "that which one acts to gain and or keep", using the definition that Rand gave and my opponent agreed with, My opponent has made the mistake, it seems, of putting the cart before the horse: he claims that, because life would not be worth living or…
Before addressing any of my opponent's particular augments, I first have to say that his overview of Objectivism in his first paragraph was on-the-money, and expanded an important point that may not have had a fully explicit explanation in my previous round - that morality is…
Against
This has been fun, but I think my argument stands as it is. If you want to believe that the canvas is more important than the painting, read Rand. I hope to see you soon bossy.
Firstly, I am not a nihilist. I am not attempting to argue that nothing is true and everything is permitted, nor is that the implication of my critique. While rejecting that there is a standard given to us to enable us to evaluate existence, I fully realise that "the only way…
43.
Nothingness is negative rather than neutral
For
Con just forfeited the round. I'd like to remind the voters that the point of this debate is not for me to prove that nothingness is negative, just for me to demonstrate that it is more reasonable to believe that a state of nothingness would be negative as opposed to neutral.…
Con did not address any of my arguments. She claims there's a lot wrong with what I said but hasn't specified WHAT and WHY. CA1: "Too long" This is subjective. To many it could be too short because they don't fully understand what I mean and therefore want me to elaborate. For…
Against
Kindly, There is a lot wrong with that. (A) It's really too long. (B) You assume SO MUCH. You stand on a firm ground which assumes ontological fact (i.e. truth), but you are no God and you do not know. So many of the conceptions you assert can well be an illusion of this world,…
To say that the nature of Nothingness is Negative assumes existence in the understanding of the world (to be clear and explicit - this is not given! Nothingness assumes nothing!). 1) Check out Heidegger-An Introduction To Metaphysics. There he makes a good argument (one I…
44.
Truth exists independently of human belief
For
By your logic: Truth: my existence, all that I can experience. Statement: I exist. Therefore, truth exists. Honestly, there's no way for you to win this. To claim that there is no truth is making a claim that you say is true. If it is true, truth exists. If it is false, then…
Is your above statement true?
Against
existence=true false and truth
true=personal physical experience of now false=anywhere beyond my personal physical experience of now I am here now, so I must have gotten here somehow, and the future is unknown
45.
Parental authority derives only from property ownership
For
Thank you for accepting. I've heard parents say to children over and over, "I'm your parent, do what I say". That saying is completely invalid. Ultimately, any control, authority, or power that parents have over children is NOT a result of "God given" authority or "deserved…
Parental authority only exists through possession of capital and property ownership. Discussion based on the reality of parental authority. Parental authority over children(exempting infancy stages, and assuming the child can make definite decisions) is artificial and only…
Against
A parent is not under any code or obligation to not (and righteously so) lay a whooping down when the situation warrants. Fear of physical reprisal stacks up pretty well in parental authority, quite literally anyone smacking around a kid that wasn't theirs gets a quick stop at…
This is a rather challenging premise, I look forward to debating it. I am working under the assumpt of 'capital' being some variety of resource brokered for goods and services, and property ownership, as mentioned to be a domicile of some kind; apartment, house, etc.
46.
Ultimate good and ultimate love are metaphysical
For
Since you already conceded that the Proposition is a truism [even though you meant only mine and others understanding of it] you surrendered the debate. It does no good to try to back-peddle and claim that your understanding was in reality and mine was in conceptualism. For to…
You have already conceded to the Affirmative (Pro) of this DEBATE twice. Once in your first sentence and another in your second sentence. In your first sentence you stated that the proposition 'Ultimate Good and Ultimate Love Are Metaphysical' were a truism. A truism, According…
Against
Reality by definition cannot be make believe. Conceptuality by definition is make believe. Pro has no argument beyond Round 1. They simply propose something that by definition is undeniable, And then rest on their laurels. The basis of my argument from the start was the…
If we look at definition, Then your opening proposition is undeniably a truism. If we regard your second round, It is clear that you have misread and misunderstood a key statement of my opening gambit. And then disregarded all other content. A much used tactic on D. D. O.…
47.
Originality is always better than imitating others' ideas
For
Imitation can never be useful for example.One of the people who refused to imitate others or move with the flow was Steve Jobs .When Jobs first joined the famous company Apple he refused to imitate others and thought of creating something new. Another example of a person who…
How is it better to imitate?!
Against
My opponent has not given any opening arguments, therefore I will proceed with mine. To begin, I would like to provide a few definitions that I believe we can both agree with. I will define "original" as synonyms to "unique," namely, something completely free from outside…
I accept. I will argue that it is sometimes better to imitate or use the ideas of others.
48.
The supernatural exists in reality
For
Good evening, and thank you for coming to tonight's debate.My opponent stipulates that I may defend any version of the supernatural I wish, so let me define the version of supernatural I intend to defend in this debate.The supernatural refers to one of two things: (1) to…
This space intentionally left blank.
Against
Proving a negative is not demonstrating your claim. You have the burden of proof so you need to make the positive claim. But I don't care I want to debate anyway so I'll take a stab at it. You start by saying "Naturalism (the view that only the natural exists) is self-refuting…
Plain and simple. Things that are supernatural have not been demonstrated, therefore I reject the claim that the supernatural exists. If anyone has a valid argument for the existence of the supernatural, please share. I will argue any version of the supernatural you wish. You…
49.
Euthyphro's dilemma is a false dilemma
For
My opponent may not think his arguments are irrelevant, but anyone with a clue of what Euthyphro's dilemma is about will know just how wrong he is. He takes a few phrases out of my arguments and "refutes" them out of context. I said that even if morality is arbitrary by God's…
Was it deliberate or a mistake o. O? Basically, my opponent centers his entire argument by dissecting one of my sentences, then attacking each of these two parts individually. I'll explain: =====Counterarguments===== 1. Some argument about the amount of Christians OF COURSE the…
Against
ON WITH THE GOOD STUFF. "Well if you read the definitions, then God is OMNISCIENCT. He knows EVERYTHING." Prove it. This is basically what's causing the problems. I would have challenged you the first time, but there was not enough room:) "Apparently, my opponent has no clue…
My arguements are not irrelevant. You stated this exactly: I argue that it doesn't matter if God commands what is moral, or whatever is moral is "arbitrary". Because God is omnibenevolent, then his moral commands are "good". I will leave it as this for now, and await my…
50.
Humans create their own destiny
For
My opponent violated the rule.Round 1 should only be for acceptance. *Being responsible means responding in the moment, and moment by moment, with the freshness of pure consciousness, pure awareness. If we are reacting in our mind, then we are not responding. When we respond,…
I like to make an argument(reasoning) about this topic. Maximum of 2,000 characters only per side. definition:Destiny is used with regard to the finality of events as they have worked themselves out; and to that same sense of "destination", projected into the future to become…
Against
Our Destinies are made up of much more than just our own influence. How might those taken by plague or disease, beaten by cultural and societal mayhem create for themselves a destiny of luxury and wealth? Many people stand idly by, behind polished wood tables, marking up what…
I appologize for violating round 1's acceptence rule, I am new to debate and wasn't quite sure what was implied by the word. While I agree that "When we over-think we under-do." I fail to see how it ;pure inert concsiousness, can change ones destiny past what is possible in set…

How to use these debate topics

Vote, discuss, revote. Poll the room on the motion, give 5 minutes of discussion, then vote again and look at who changed their mind.
Four corners. Label corners strongly agree → strongly disagree; people move, then each corner makes its best case.
Switch sides. Halfway through, everyone argues the side they disagree with. It sharpens listening.

Run them live

Want every person to answer on their own phone, with a timer and a live leaderboard? Use these questions in an EngageSlide Vote · Discuss · Revote — free to start.

Tick questions on any page — your set is kept while you browse (or take the first 10 here) — and they become ready-to-play slides. What is EngageSlide?

Philosophy Debate Topics

How to use these debate topics

Run them live

More question collections