Philosophy Debate Topics — page 29

For

• "Omnibenevolence will always cause the greatest good possible because that is the definition of omnibenevolence. Infinitely good, i.e, always taking the action that causes the most good. Firstly, let me say that omnipotence means that God can do anything. So, no matter what…
• "I am making no hidden assumptions. Omnibenevolence means that God will always choose the action that causes the greatest good. Having no evil is the greatest good. God knows of this, and is capable of carrying it out. Therefore, if God existed, He would have an obligation to…

For

• "You are not a philosopher so do not act like one. " Attack the position, not the person. "What about parents being proud of their children? You are saying that all pride is wrong and yet, parents are taught to be proud of their family and children. " If you'd like to go back…
• "Pride of your sexual orientation and other things is good, be proud of who and what you are." So I should be proud that I am a heterosexual like 95% of the human population? I should wear t-shirts, "hetero and proud," so I gain all this attention? See, pride tends to…

For

• Altruism: the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.In order for an action to be truly altruistic the action must be committed with the intention to help someone else without considering the benefits for one self. If an action…
• I must try to be brief. There really is no proof for anything so all of my statements are therefore just assumptions based on logic. But they are assumptions backed up by a lot of evidence. Some of them will be bold. Criticize if you wish.Your question P.S.2: There is nothing…

For

• (Random BS made for filling up space.) =P
• Thanks to Con for his argument! Now, I recall my opponent saying that he was okay with me using a slightly different version of the KCA; one that argues for God being the cause, but not for his existence. Not at least in the structure of the argument itself, but depending on…

For

• So do you think that suppression can work? IT IS NOT NECESSARY THE CASE THAT a man have to use suppression to control his state of mind. Aristotle mentioned that some emotions if well used serve as an arms. Probably he used it as example in self-defend in a moment of he needs…
• according to ARISTOTLE feelings are a big fact to change man as to effect their judgments, a man can also expect to be specially respected by his inferior in birth, in capacity, in goodness, and generally in anything in which he is much their superior as where money concern a…

For

• con goes against the what philsophers have commonly called truth. eg morality etc. even beyond morality, sure there are other kinds of truth. but con hasn't gotten into other truth, just word games. con hasn't established anything new there, so i can't respond to much of…
• con is just playing a bunch of games, at best. truth in those situations is: scientists define the parameters for what constitutions a planet, and they define how many planets there are based on best available observation. that is the only truth we can really establish. based…

For

• Existence:the fact or state of living or having objective reality. I don't believe we can say we exist. Open to being wrong.
• Irrational about being unsure of our existence is better than finding purpose in religion. Religion is based on belief not rationality. If we find the answer to our existence we might find objective purpose, Religion for as long has its been around has not provided one. You…

For

• **Thanks for accepting the debate and good luck, I hope since this is my first debate I still make a challenging match** Intro: The resolution: "In society the common good should be valued over the individual's interest" Does not include the term Democracy anywhere. Since your…
• Individual interests interfere with the flow of society, as common individual interest's form a majority and represent the greater good, the common good. Therefore, as all successful societies are based upon utilitarianism, the greater good should be valued over the…

For

• Here are my arguments: (P.S. my keyboard is not really working well, so there might be words missing letters in my arguents.) 1. When someone does something that benefits the group, it may not benefit him or herself at first, though as he or she is also a part of the group, he…
• This is what you said: "Straw man. The mere fact that I don't support majority rule does not imply that I support minority rule. They are both collectivist ideas. Utilitarianism can hardly be counted as a moral worldview. Happiness is not a moral authority, as it depends on the…

For

• "An example perhaps?" 1. Premise: Humans have free will 2. Free will cannot exist if our mental capabilities are purely natural 3. Therefore, our mental capacities must draw on some aspect of the supernatural. "And are you saying space isn't part of the universe?" I didn't feel…
• "The word "universe" is defined, in essence, as everything in existence. Everything." Not necessarily. The universe can be defined as mass and energy. The attribute of intelligence and will can very much be something beyond mass and energy. In addition, I am referring to the…

For

• I choose to forfeit this debate, as I do not plan on using DEBATE.ORG. I have found a better online debate community.
• Thanks in advance to the person who accepts this debate. This was a recent UIL topic that I enjoyed debating and wanted to try it out as my first debate on this site. Ld Structure please (including CX) William Baxter, the Professor of Law at Stanford University, stated that…

For

• Think about it this way Perfect by definition means "when something is as good as it can possibly be" Everyone, however, has a very different idea of what is good. If everyone had the same definition of perfection, then a perfect utopia WOULD be achievable. The question of this…
• I would love to debate this topic. Let's do it!

For

• Thank you - I understand your argument. Friend you gave a definition of freedom that is not that bad. I have no real problem with it except in the context of which you have grounded your objection. You state that "You can't "act or speak" without making the choice to do so.…
• The negation will need to show how having or even making a choice is the same as being free. Democrat or Republican. Target or Walmart or Sears or Fred Meyers. You can have as many choices as are available. Choice could be a fancy word in reality for dilemma. Everyday our lives…

For

• Determinism Versus Free Will: The Difference is Options In the determinism versus free will debate, determinists believe causality and choice are mutually exclusive – while compatibilists believe they are intimately intertwined. I will attempt to present a rational argument for…
• My opponent jumps right into the fray with an intentional, flat-out, self-serving misrepresentation. And I quote: "My opponent claims that it is philosophy, not science, that should answer the question before us." My opponent continues, unrelenting, in his dishonest tactics.…

For

• You may do whatever you want, but if you look in the comments you will see why.
• Forfeiture.

For

• Definition- Property Dualism: the philosophical position stating that although there is only one kind of substance, the material, that there are two kinds of properties: physical and mental. I believe this is the theory of mind with fewest pitfalls and therefore the best. CON…

For

• Wow. Where to begin. My opp has built quite a few straw men. I'll start with those. He accused me of "invoking the homunculus problem." For those of you who don't know what that is, the homunculus idea is that there is an agent that is not ourselves that is in our brain making…
• Thanks for joining. First, a clarification. I am not talking about proof here. I am talking about understanding. There is an entire class of phenomena that can never be understood through science. Let me now go ahead and explain what this class of phenomena is that I'm talking…

For

• I can tell you did not read the rule about argument size.. "This wager is incomplete because it ignores every other religion." No, it doesn't. It simply states that it is safer to be Theist than to not to be a Theist. "Thus it is very obvious that the best pick is Thor worship…
• Thank you for accepting. Now, The only argument that I've known against Pascal's Wager is reverse Ad Populus and "Dumb Christians use it, so it's fallible". The other argument i've seen is "It's just as probable that Atheits will go to heaven". But, if you think about it, it…

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

• For the final stage in my argument, I intend to prove that despite both our arguments on the nature of a first cause, we cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt either of our suggestions, and will explain how this in fact also supports the motion that universe has a purpose. As…
• I shall begin the next stage of my argument with some rebuttals to the various points and counter-arguments raised by the opposition, chiefly the sentience of the first cause. Additionally I intend to introduce a new key point in my argument, regarding humanity. Primarily then,…

For

• mars is actually likely to be populated within our lifetime, or atl east soon relatively. space x has shown a lot of potential to do so. i could get into the details, but it is beside the point. space expansion is possible. it is rooted in reality. it is doable. time travel is…
• it is possible in theory for an advanced hominid to arise. therefore, it is illogical to ignore that possibility. in the astronomical aspect of time, we will be expanding into the universe, or die. i would hope we expand. mars, to the moons of jupiter where there's more energy…

For

• Indeed, we cannot anticipate the result of the action accurately, but that does not prove my definition is false. I did not know "some loss of life" means "hundreds of people be massacred". In that case, I expect that to frame and not to frame are evil both. The intent is also…
• The action increasing the amount of happiness than unhappiness is morally and ethically correct. I agree that the owner is unhappy and that stealing brings happiness to the middle class at a certain time. However, the action's impact should be evaluated not by certain figures…

For

• Extend my argument, back to Con,
• Definitions: Weaken: to (cause to) become less strong, powerful, or determined Attack: An action that produces negative effects. An action or behavior that is in opposition to the goals of another. Strengthen: To increase the ability of, to provide for, to make more effective…

For

• The feeling of being an individual separate from ones environment is inevitably found to be illusory. There is no core to being, no "observer" or "soul" that continues from life to life, or even, from moment to moment. All things are subject to change, and there is no…
• Sorry that I didn't start this debate. Way too much going on in college.Some very interesting arguments you put out there. Let's have a look, shall we?In the first philosophical argument, Con argues that it is concievable for an individual self/soul/consciousness to exist…

For

• I will attempt to keep my conclusion as simple as possible.1. It must be remembered that scientifically, and philosophically the difference between living and non-living is only a matter of slight difference.2. Performing an action is not the same a making a choice. 3. Religion…
• I would like to address my opponents comments regarding my conduct. Firstly, I concede that it was "bad form" to not have a definition already presented at the beginning of the debate. I apologise for this, and I am well aware that ignorance of the common code of conduct is no…

For

• truth is not true so because facts can not not be fact science has no facts, becasue science can be wrong, because i dont know that they are right you can believe anything.. clearly belief is not truth you cant think without having the ability to believe
• like negative is anti positive

For

• well, i see your point. it's the same arguments i made during the 'god paradox' debates. i would say that if con's arguments are legit here, they should be legit in the god paradox debate. it could still be said that there is in fact a limit on the unlimitd, god, in that it…
• the 'unlimited paradox' - the unlimited is proven to be a false idea weakest point. the unlimited paradox states that an immovable object cannot exist at the same time as an unstoppable force. the fact that it cannot exist at the same time, shows that the unlimited truly…

For

• Closing ArgumentsThe Kalam Cosmological argument is not logically sound. The premise "whatever begins to exist, has a cause" is baseless, so Premise 1 fails. The only thing backing up Premise 2 is The Big Bang, but that only states that the universe as we know it came from the…
• "An argument can be two things: valid and/or sound. In order for an argument (e.g. the Kalam Cosmological Argument) to be valid, its conclusion must follow logically from its premises. It does, therefore the Kalam Cosmological Argument is valid."In no way does "God is the cause…

For

• Well, this is my first time debating with a woman. Hope it turns out well. To start with my argument, Being Bad Is Easier. Reasons To Believe:- 1) When a person is bad, they do things that makes others suffer. Naturally, making others suffer would mean that the person making…
• Being bad is obviously, bad. But it's appears that being bad takes less effort than being good. With being good comes the responsibility, patience, tolerance and alot of other things which in case you are bad, isn't necessary. First round;- acceptance and a bit of opinionative…

For

• Hello. I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this argument, I hope to show that the two largest idealogies in episteomology are flawed and that a new way of looking at knowledge is needed. First, I will show the flaw's with Empiricism and to a lesser extent the whole…
• This is a debate regarding Rationalism and Empiricism, two directly conflicting ways of gaining knowledge and of looking at the world. I will be arguing that though each of these theories have obvious pros to them, there are enough cons that we can confidently say that…

For

• I'll expand upon Aquinas's 5 proofs here: 1. First Mover: S1. Objects are in motion. S2. If something is in motion, then it must be caused to be in motion by something else. S3. There cannot be an infinite chain of movers as the universe is finite. S4. There must be a first,…
• I am going to argue they work as a proof for the existence of God. My opponent argues the opposite they do not logically work as a proof for the existence of God. In summary, these proofs are as follows (I'll expand on them later I'm just defining what they are here) c/p 1.…

For

• Here we are, the final round of debating, and without a further ado; 1. Humans and emotion - Survival of the fittest doesn't fit with our world view today; we humans, right now, living on Earth, need to look out for ourselves, the environment, and countless other small things.…
• Humans and emotion - Except for moral choices. Humans need emotion sometimes to guide them, as individuals, through tough times in their lives. Just because they had to make a hard decision doesn't mean they aren't intelligent; all it means is that we are emotional creatures,…

For

• Yo do they have those in real life{{{{{when he said those he was not referring to tactical insertions in general he was reffering to the box that respawns human beings ergo the question itself becomes stupid. it was not to tease or annoy. he asked a seriously stupid question. i…
• ok so heres how it goes. I am playing black ops with my cousin. now just so you have an understanding my cousin is not 5 years old or 10 he is in grade 11. Now hes watching me destroy people and then he sees me drop a tactical insertion which is basically a little box with…

For

• No time and essence are the same after.
• Charlie Brown says: RATS! Charlie Brown says: I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT ... Charlie Brown says: HOW COME SOME PEOPLE GET NO CHRISTMAS CARDS WHILE OTHER PEOPLE GET A WHOLE LOT OF THEM? Snoopy thinks: SOME OF US HAVE MORE FRIENDS

For

• Extend
• Extend

For

• Humans are not artificial. God created us, using only dust and breathed into us the breath of Life. Humans are not artificial because we are not made by other men.
• I accept.

For

• I'll agree that it's often difficult or not natural to place our desires above others. The problem is the few that do. They can take advantage of the rest of us in an extreme way cou*Trump/Putin*gh. A strong self-focus is also natural so the goal has to be a balance between the…
• Ayn Rand was an complete b/c. I'm just saying this as a concession to point out that it doesn't support my case or the Con case. Cult like, spiteful and a poor communicator in my view. That doesn't detract from her ideas. I don't think I'll really site her books (I don't think…

For

• Ave. I'm going to give a general summary of the debate to show that a Pro vote is justified. I will respond to new arguments brought up by Con as well. The first argument I gave against the KCA was from the theory of relativity. The KCA assumes that the theory of relativity is…
• Ave.I have two contentions in regards to a personal cause of the universe. 1) The KCA demonstrates that there is no need for a personal cause of matter. 2) A personal cause of the universe is unnecessary given the evidence from physics.1: The KCA depends on the idea of…

For

• Resolution The moral argument for God's existence is not sound. Structure R1. Acceptance R2. Opening Arguments R3. First Rebuttals R4. Second Rebuttals R5. Closing Statements Rules 1. No arguments in the first round. 2. No new arguments in the last round. 3. Do your best to…
• This round is for conclusions. No new arguments should be added. A summary of previous arguments and an appeal to the voter will be allowed. Conduct Scotty and I both maintained reasonable conduct. As long as Scotty doesn't break any rules in his last round (like adding new…

For

• My opponents resolution: Physical reality is false or not realI apologise deeply for not explaining my resolutions properly in round 1. In the previous rounds I take my definitions from a different source from con as you can see in my source links in the previous rounds. Here…
• To clear any confusion: Definition of Solid; of definite shape and volume; not liquid or gaseous (1) Con has stated the obvous above. Even if physical reality is mostly empty there's still all those really solid atoms there. But, is the atom as unmoving, unchanging and solid as…

For

• Con has chosen to open his second round argument with an unambiguous and baseless ad hominem attack. Con's first round argument is far afield of the scope of this debate which is namely the concept of "objective morality". I was initially inclined to dismiss his attempt to…
• Please don't conflate scientific observation and moral judgment. Oh, ok, nevermind. Go right ahead. 1) Even the staunchest proponents of so called "scientific morality" propose a flexible survey based standard which would change over time, and/or a consequentialist position…

For

• I'm very sad that my opponent would start a debate and then not debate; nonetheless, hopefully we can work something out to actually debate this topic in the future.
• There's been a mistake in the positional arguments. I am against the idea that Nihilism will degrade mankind, however the debate labels me as "Pro." I forgot to cite the [1] http://www.nihil.org... With forfeiture, all of my arguments with stand.

For

• Your argument is based on regressive ideology. Regression is not a virtue when progression is the goal. If we are to move forward true wisdom is of the utmost importance, much more so than our basic survival needs. We will always be able to hunt and gather like our ancestors…
• Hopefully others will learn something from our discourse. Secondly I would like to remind you that the term "race" is strictly a categorization of and does not replace the term humanity. The "survival of the fittest" mentality is archaic and nondescript; it has no place in…

For

• It is in my belief that objective morality exists. Con must argue that it doesn't exist. First round must be an argument in response. This a serious debate.
• Oh, right. I forgot about that rule. I suppose we can redo it.

For

• I feel it is more important to be a human first than a citizen. For example, if someone is residing in his enemy country and if he is in urgency... then what should citizen of that country do...obviously they are gonna help him.
• you should read an story, The Enemy by PEARL S. BUCK. in it there is a soldier of war who is successful of escapng the prison. and as he is badly wounded, an surgeon of enemy country shows humanity and saves his life. now you only say if the surgeon would think of patriotism,…

For

• money is the root of all evil as it is the only thing that modern day society thinks about

For

• Although you forfeited, i really enjoyed our debate. Thank you for a good time! :)
• Imperfectadjective 1. of, relating to, or characterized by defects or weaknesses: imperfect vision. 2. not perfect; lacking completeness: imperfect knowledge.Ah yes. I have heard the term, "That's perfect!" But is it really? If someone is building a house, and they say that it…

For

• As Con has put forth no more arguments, the resolution stands.
• Extend all arguments.

For

• Is God more complex than the universe or the human He is supposed to have created? It might seem not, because God represents what seems to be a simple concept: omnipotent, omniscient, and good\. By contrast, the universe seems to be a vast maize of galaxies and forces. I…
• 1. Con offers three alternative definitions of AD, all three of which clearly contain the same two inherent contradictions as the more-encompassing definition that I offered. Con offered no argument as to why the two fallacies would not apply to his versions of AD, therefore…

For

• The difference between the stick appearing bent and the illusions I mentioned, is that it"s much easier to account any mistaken judgement from the former as a conceptual mistake. Of course we shouldn"t believe that the stick is actually bent. We know that it"s merely an…
• Please disregard Con's forfeit. His case can be found in this document: https://docs.google.com...According to Con there are three basic axioms of Objectivism: existence exists, things which exist must exist as things, and there is consciousness to perceive existence. Con…