 |
LR4N6FTW4EVA's Debates
  |
The United States federal government should provide universal health care to its citizens.
First, parameters. Universal Health care: any system of health care that the federal government pays for for all citizens Other than that, I think we're fine. If you feel other parameters are necessary, let me know. My case: The question that is important in this situation is: "What is the purpose of a government?" The answer to this question is that a government is supposed to protect the rights of the people. The people form governments to escape the so-called state of nature, in whic...
Resolved: Consequentialism should trump deontology in the matter of national defense.
Resolved: Consequentialism should trump deontology in the matter of US national security. Definitions: Consequentilism: an action should be determined by the consequences of an action rather then the immediate action itself. "Ends justify means." Trump: exceed, overcome, take precedence over. Deontology: an action should be determined by the action itself rather then the outcome of the action. "Ends do not justify the means." National Security: The matter of defending the nation w...
it is better to be poor and young than to be rich and old
The biggest curse to human is 'old age'....give ur views..... if it is better to be poor and young than to be rich and old....
The existence of God is a logical truth.
God: the supreme deity of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam logical truth: something that can be proved logically existence: occurrence Your move CON....
Metaphysics Debate
Okay, I feel like debating metaphysical stuff, but I don't know which, so here are some topics, if you want to go PRO for the topics I list, we can change them to the negative, so as not to confuse anyone. 1. If we accept agnosticism, you can't prove anything. 2. If life is really but a dream, then we should still live it like it is reality. 3. Empirical evidence is not logically sound. 4. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is an unreasonable burden of proof. (The argument I have for this will be...
It is illogical to choose birth as the milestone for attaining rights.
Okay, CON, you have first move. I'll set parameters. illogical: violating the rules of logic birth: when one exits the womb milestone: point rights: basic privileges guaranteed to all persons This is primarily referring to humans, but this goes for any other person, however you want to define that....
Religocity is simply bad epistemology
I will defend that a reasonable epistemological stance includes two premises: 1. Claims without evidence are not believed. 2. The degree to which one believed a claim should scale with the evidence. Now, we have to distinguish between two kinds of religious belief: evidence-sensitive and evidence-insensitive. Evidence-insensitive belief or 'faith-only' is rules out by premise one. In almost any non-trivial circumstance, one should not (and empirically, people do not) believe a claim un...
Firefly was one of the best shows on Fox and shouldn't have been cancelled.
Let me just thank my opponent in advance for accepting this debate and I wish him/her the best of luck. Also, to win, my opponent has to convince me and/or the general public that Firefly deserved to be cancelled and/or is a shitty show in general. First, Firefly was a show on Fox a while back and it was by far my favorite show pretty much of all time. I have my reasons for this, and I intend to prove each one of them in turn. One: Acting First of all the acting is phenomenal. Nathan Fi...
Human life has no intrinsic value.
Human life is valued by many around the world, religions, philosophers, all value human life above all other life. Human life is treated as if it has intrinsic value that makes it better than all other life. I strongly disagree with this sentiment. If human life has intrinsic value, than either humans as a species are simply intrinsically valuable, or all life is intrinsically valuable. Neither of these sentiments are correct. Let's look at two situations. 1. Humans are simply the most intrin...
Metaphysics Debate
Okay, I feel like debating metaphysical stuff, but I don't know which, so here are some topics, if you want to go PRO for the topics I list, we can change them to the negative, so as not to confuse anyone. 1. If we accept agnosticism, you can't prove anything. 2. If life is really but a dream, then we should still live it like it is reality. 3. Empirical evidence is not logically sound. 4. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is an unreasonable burden of proof. (The argument I have for this will be...