Philosophy Debate Topics for Students — page 5

For

• I forfeit.
• Due to bad internet, I have asked bossyburrito to let me post this as a docs.google (well within 10, 000 characters) and I shall type it out before tomorrow. Thanks again bossy. https://docs.google.com...

For

• I am not exactly sure what it is we are debating. I'm assuming it's the existence of the soul… but "Life beyond death" was your resolution. The Soul: The soul is defined as Wikipedia as "A soul, in certain spiritual, philosophical, and psychological traditions, is the…
• Nice language, thanks for the free win. Well not im irritated. .. Not even going to bother to comment on anything in that last post, thanks for the debate.

For

• The three basic premises.1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause. 2. The universe began to exist.3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.Introduction I would like to focus on the above three premises of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. You are requested to otherwise put…
• It would seem the Con couldn't post his arguments in time, I suspect that this was not an intended forfeit. At any rate, I will go ahead and make my closing arguments... and Con can go ahead and make all his arguments in the last round.In this last round I will begin by going…

For

• I win.
• Easy win proceed. :)

For

• Con seems to believe that I'm intentionally engineering anunclear argument to "win". He charges me with semantic trickery. He assumes badfaith of me in doing so. I have no pretense to "win" by wordy exhaustion. His attempt to stylistically contrast his argument with mineby…
• On review, I must admit that my initial argument was written in aselfish, obscure, and masturbatory style which I regret and which Con rightlycriticizes. I want to clean up several points, but not before first thanking Con for accepting this debate and, perhaps, for ribbing me…

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…

For

• seeing con did not reply to round 2 that seems then I win
• you say "No, theyre not related. Science is based on logic and fact. Mystical theology isn't." they are still saying thing Zajak notes "particles and waves are macroscopic concepts which gradually lose their relevance as we approach the submicroscopic domain." Bohr quoted in A,…

For

• There is definitely good and bad music. While some may believe it is based solely on perspective and one's taste, I believe it is not. Today, it seems as if music has taken a turn for the worst. Has everything innovative and exciting been discovered and explored? It feels as if…

For

• Resolution: No being can posses omniscience as a property.I will be arguing that it is logically impossible for any being to posses omniscience as a property. My opponent will be arguing the opposite. The burden of proof is shared.DefinitionsOmniscience - Knowing…
• Unfortunately, Con has decided to forfeit. I extend all my arguments.

For

• Since I am giving final thoughts, I will not add anything new to the debate. Instead, I will summarize what my opponent and I have discussed and briefly re-state my position. I am arguing that good and evil exist, and my opponent argued the converse (that they do not exist).…
• Rebuttals I appreciate that my opponent clarified my scenario. I brought up the possible motive of killing to explain how someone could still kill someone without being spurred by the scenario he was in"thus, person A would "feel like" killing person B at some point. To be…

For

• If you feel that everything is permissible, You are not increasing your tolerance--you are eliminating it. Likely, You still feel some things are BAD, And you are likely to be fairly intolerant of those things.
• Ha ha ha ha, No I did not anticipate this line of attack. Nevertheless, My argument and my thesis both survive the challenge. 1 === Definitions === I began the definitions section with normative behavior, Which included the "human" constraint on behaviors that you cite. Each…

For

• I see your point about prey not "giving itself up" to its predator, but my point is not about animal or human instinct but more or less why there is life and why life has any point; not whether death supports life. Therefore, wouldn't the only reason life continues be because…
• If no living thing supported other life their would be no life. For example leaving a child in the wilderness but plants and animals could not support the child the child would have nothing to eat and therefore die. If plants could not feed other living things animals of all…

For

• "This is the argument that my opponent gives. He says that man is responsible for most problems in this world. Man is responsible for starvation. Actually many other species starve as well. This is not an example of a man made problem. In addition, my opponent has not shown…
• Firstly I mean by man kind as yard stick. Anything is done or made by man or man him or herself. For example the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima and a person robbing a bank both fit the definition that I put forward. I will subvert your argument in order. A) The three main…

For

• You have the wrong idea of my argument. I am not saying that believers are frauds. I am saying that there is one way to truth in reality. Take truth and accept the bitter with the sweet, or take what may seem to be comfortable but is really falsehood. It's each individual's…
• My point is, where should faith be placed? To illustrate, there are many chairs in an abandoned house. Most are obviously in bad shape, so bad in fact, that if you tried to sit in one of these they would probably fall apart. However, attached to the floor is a chair that is…

For

• As per rules I will not argue here, also I would like to apologize to my opponent for not being able to go all three rounds.
• I have read Locke's essay and come to the realization that I did in-fact misunderstand the theory. With that said I concede this round I no longer have any argument.

For

• 1.Agree. 2. If she is mentally sick then she had to stay make do something before what will able to protect her children or sent her children any day care where they could be alive except of got killed from own Mather. 3. If you friend does it I remomend it to you that tell her…
• 1. Agree only because of anger's angry depends on their feelings but, children are angel to parents. Parents love their children more than their own life. So how come a mother behaved to her children as a behave like an enemy? 2. She chose kill her own children who are innocent…

For

• Since we are discussing the validity of Bostrom's arguments, all definitions should come from Bostrom. Bostrom's original paper defined the "post human stage of civilization" as that stage ". . . where humankind has acquired most of the technological capabilities that one can…
• The Bostrom Simulation Argument means the argument made by Nick Bostrom in the following paper: http://www.simulation-argument.com... Likely means more likely than not, i.e. having a probability of more than 50%. Correct: True; in this context, accurately reflecting reality. To…

For

• You're right, I cannot say for certain what each individual's life purpose is, but I believe it is safe to say that, as a species, we are constantly trying to better ourselves. By creating individual realities and avoiding our mutual reality, we will fail to evolve as a…
• My opponent has failed to answer or address any of my points, and has merely repeated what was said originally. Because of this, I will use this round to ask my opponent a few questions and reiterate my points. 1. What do you believe the point of life is? 2. Do you agree that…

For

• convince me how u can lead using mind power rather than muscle power

For

• My opponent bases her entire argument on the fact that what has happened in the past affects us in many ways. It seems that she has not properly read or understood what this debate is about. In Round 1 I set terms on this debate and clearly ruled that:"this debate is not about…
• Very well, thank you for accepting. Onto the point then. There are countless cases where people mistakenly blame innocent individuals for actions they did not commit. For example, if a rape lawsuit is publicly charged against a man who has not committed the rape, no matter what…

For

• In modern society we are faced with a never ending inescapable onslaught of consumerism through images presented from the media beginning almost immediately at birth. The newly born infant is given clothes embedded with a character from a show that plays colorful flashing…
• I will be arguing that, due to the impact of media (all forms) and consumerism, it is now impossible to have an independent thought or a unique emotion. This applies to any person raised in a society where media is often being consumed. Somewhat rusty with debates and I forget…

For

• I believe that the choice we makes determines the future.As we make the right choice it leads to success

For

• Please extend all of my arguments from the last round into this one. All of them still stand, and they haven't been negated by my opponent. I have won this debate because I effectivly built offense in my favor, which still stands, and responded to the claims made by my…
• First I'd like to point out that there is little to no offense on my opponent's side. Although she can win this way, if I prove one contention true, there is reason enough to affirm. With that said, let's look at the arguments made in the last round. CONTENTION I: First, the…

For

• I am taking the position that if one wants to be tolerated at large, one must tolerate the intolerant for the sake of consistency so not to pervert the principle. You will argue that this is not the case.

For

• there is not such thing freewill

For

• I'm basically restarting this debate, because otherwise, it would have only been 3 rounds with the same rules (so really, two rounds of arguments, which would have been a bit lame. ) First, I'll define some key terms. 1. Anarcho Capitalism - (from Investopedia) A term coined by…
• What is the State? Max Weber defined it as the monopoly over the legitimate uses of force and violence. As Michael Parent further explains: "It is not the mediator an creator of policy as such. It is the purveyor, it is the protector of the status quo, of law and order. The…

For

• Ave.AnswersQ1: The question isn't specific enough to answer effectively. If some experiment were conducted that conclusively shows that the universe came from an actual nothing, then I would see no reason as to why god needed to cause the universe to exist. Personally, I have…
• Ave.Con begins by using examples from quantum mechanics to demonstrate that things happen without cause. I think that there are good reasons to be skeptical of his claim. Con's examples assume that the Copenhagen interpretation is true. This interpretation has been widely…

For

• I thank Con for his quick reply and apologize for my delay in posting my arguments."He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither." -Benjamin Franklin The first Amendment of the Bill of rights states that: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of…
• I would like to mention a few things before Con commences his arguments DefinitionsFreedom - 1) the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action 2) liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another 3) The condition of being free; the power…

For

• I thank Con for a very interesting first debate for me on DDO! For this round, I will summarize many of the arguments that have been made as I debate them in this round, since it is the last round. Therefore, this speech will be substantially longer than those that I've had…
• I thank Con for his reply!Con's Arguments: I will attempt to summarize the arguments that Con has made in the previous round – if I have unwittingly straw-manned or omitted any of his arguments, I urge him to inform me.Argument 1: Statistically, secular people behave more…

For

• Hello, To start I would like to clarify that I Believe that morality is merely an illusion...but I also believe it is one that we should act as if it is real. This, however, is a theoretical debate. It states that morality must be absolute if it is to "exist" at all. For…

For

• I was hoping for more of a rebuttal from Con, but I guess I will take a 0 to 0 tie against a user with a higher Elo than myself as a personal victory. Good debate.
• My opponent is correct that the resolution is not "Words have no intrinsic meaning". Biased Voting is Not Allowed Here on debate.org, there are rules that are to be followed when voting on a debate. One of these rules includes the topic of "Voting based on personal bias" [1].…

For

• (Please know my font won't process for some reason. )Thank you Con, I really enjoyed this debate. Truly my opponent has misrepresented my analogy and then attempted to show how it contradicts my position. Hold up farm boy, no need to start building those straw men. I was…
• A 'Drop' One small point to mention before we continue, while my opponent does attempt to refute my objections to Kantian theory, he doesn't attack my reasons for believing Utilitarianism. This drop isn't game breaking, but it shows my opponent agrees that there are reasons to…

For

• In a Capitalist economic system, the business owners who "own" the production of labor, is the most that reaps the most profits while the labor workers earn a meager wage. Capitalists don't get rich by "working hard." They get rich by exploiting the hard work of labor workers…
• What are you talking about?Just by the simple fact that you own more money gives you more economic freedom.You are free to make grander financial decisions than one who has less and you are able to have a stable, well fed lifestyle.Once you are an…

For

• My opponent has forfeited. Since this was interesting, I would like, if he is willing, to attempt this debate again, and repost the first two rounds as they are, then repost rounds three and four. Please message me if you would like to do that. Other than that I have nothing…
• I am sorry about your sister, and I hope that she is okay. I had a similar problem in a debate a while ago where my Grandfather died, and I did not have time to post either. It is fine, and if you want, we can start a new debate, repost the previous rounds, and you can have the…

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…

For

• There is no way to prove the nonexistence or existence of a deity as there is no quantifiable test that can prove existence or nonexistence. The argument stating "proof can be found by simply dying" is an invalid argument as that argument would also have to argue the existence…
• Zeus the great Greek God of the sky cannot be proven or disproved.

For

• I state that, contrary to what I hear much of the time, an athiest does not require proof in the same sense as a theist requires proof for their claim.My debater should be arguing that I require proof that a theistic God does not exist.Round 1 is for acceptance and initial…
• First, I'll say that I am thrilled to have my debate picked up by someone as articulate and well versed in argumentation as you seem to be.You have done a great job of analyzing all of the avenues in which I could have taken approach to—with one exception of course. As I state…

For

• what a person says is in their heart may not be. and technology that can read people's minds doesn't exist, so we can rule that out. judging fruits alone isn't enough. we have to know the heart, or we know nothing. we can have good guesses but that's it i could gave an example…
• duly noted

For

• By the rules I stated in round 1 I won this debate. Thanks for voting.
• 1) Since one action can be considered good by one person and bad by another person. And every particular action can be considered bad by some person, in order to be infinitely good, being would be unable to do anything. 2) If A loves something he will try to protect it. If A…

For

• First, I would like to say that this is my first debate, and I do not know how this really works but I am going to give it my best shot. Also, I don't see myself as an expert on theology, philosophy (or an expert in anything for that matter), I am but an average guy who tries…
• Use any information you find, the point is to come up with the best argument you can.

For

• First I would like to restate what it is that we are debating about. In the first round I said: "Throughout this debate I hope to prove that morality is a matter of opinion and view rather than a distinct idea that all human beings have to abide by or else they are forever…
• For a brief road map, I will go over my opponents arguments and then enforce my own. His first argument was to say that it is "impossible to prove a certain set of moral beliefs to be true" Which is completely correct, until he goes on to say that certain key values can be…

For

• " 'Premise: I love and am devoted to my country. Premise: The country most deserving of my love and devotion would be the greatest country. Therefore: My country is the greatest. Therefore: Other countries are not as great as my country. ' The first premise indicates…
• "An appreciation for one's country in no way necessitates the belief that one is in some way responsible for the country's accomplishments. What my opponent describes as patriotism in "Bob" is more accurately described as arrogance, a trait with no innate tie to patriotism." I…

For

• 'The terms selfish and unselfish are antonyms and preclude each other.' Selfish would not be without unselfish. Wouldn't be lucky without being unlucky, grateful without being ungrateful. One can not be without the other. I would like to thank you for clarifying as I am…
• I'd like your opinion on this opinion... Only a very deeply selfish person can be truly unselfish. It may look like a paradox but the first basic thing about being selfish is to be self-centered. The second is to always look for ones own blissfulness. If your self-centered…

For

• I don't know what to say. First person to FF a personal debate with me. You are an honest man, friend. I respect you.
• Everyone has a seed inside them that can be a genius, but frankly not even 1% try - the 99% are too busy getting high off of life. So many waste their time learning how to make money; learning how to get people's attention, rather than refining their mental capacity. Deductive…

For

• As long as a bit of insight remains, no one would think to hide under (ignorance).When what is exposed in the day of light as an appeal to opinion of the multitude, of whose applause the Philosopher is ashamed, but the popular charlatan glories and boast in it. Immanuel Kant in…
• The philosopher Code The Fool: One thing I could never wrap my head around is why, would anyone would be motivated to argue for the sake appearance. As a philosopher, the method of falsification is the logical refutation by others; that is you want to find the best possible…

For

• That's exactly like saying 'I've grown up in the UK so I know everything and my morals are superior to yours'. Its this western culture that has granted the arrogance of imposing our own socialised beliefs on other people. Everyone has been socialised into their own morals…
• I gave quite a few examples of eurocentrism and western beliefs of superiority because of morals and technological advances. But still my definition of superiority is the "the belief that you are better than other people"(or society in this context) but yes we will stick you…

For

• Rebuttals:1) MarriageMy opponent claims that when choosing a partner in marriage, one should rely on their emotion instead of their logic. I completely disagree with this. Simply look at any gold digging case. Rich men will marry beautiful women, and the women will use them for…
• As resolved in the comments, Con was right in not starting his arguments in round 1. Arguments:1) Emotions DecisionsThe title is self-explanatory. Emotions negatively influence decisions. This article on Psychology Today highlights this idea pretty well. .…

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…

For

• I'm going to do something very drastic. I'm going to start by assuming that god/perfection DOES NOT EXIST. 1. G does not have EX Now step two is the one my opponent is having some trouble with. I personally believe the invisible pink unicorn does not exist. That does not mean…
• His single objection I deal with in detail below. In his first premise, my opponent states that if it is possible something exists, it is possible that something does not exist. If I have a pen it is certain (and therefore possible) that the pen exists. Anything certain to…

For

• In my opinion, love is simply an emotion created by nature in order to continue the existence of a specie. Based on most humans' perceptions of love, it is something like destiny where you are meant to be together and you feel happy together. This perception is most likely…
• Firstly, about the photo, it is not of the emotions felt after a break up, but it is of the emotions felt by a person in "love". I'd like to know what made you think that it was. Maybe, I was clear enough in my last argument. What I meant was that "love" is not required to…