Philosophy Debates

 
Sort By:
Showing: 201 - 210

humans are equal to other animals

debatefox
andrew30126a

humans are equal to animals...

Post Voting Period
3 Comments
Updated 4 Months Ago

Consciousness Can Be Transferred From The Brain Into A Different Substrate

BradK
Boesball

What I am arguing is that consciousness can be produced inorganically. We all know that an infant's brain has no consciousness for a few years. Then, once the childhood amnesia wears off and the brain is developed enough for the informational pattern of consciousness to develop, it just "magically appears" for lack of a better word. (1)So from that biological fact, I argue that if you could create a machine as complex as the human brain, consciousness would also magically arise in the machine...

Post Voting Period
5 Comments
Updated 4 Months Ago

It is morally wrong for humans to eat animals.

Dookieman
ben671176

Today I will be defending the proposition that it is morally wrong for humans to eat animals, and that people are unjustified in causing suffering and death to other sentient beings for reasons of pleasure, satisfaction, or amusement....

Post Voting Period
10 Comments
Updated 2 Months Ago

The Nazis were not racist (or they were racist against white Nordics)

Adam2
ChrisF

First is for acceptance. I will be arguing that the Nazis were not racists against most people. The only people they were racist against were Nordic Europeans....

Post Voting Period
10 Comments
Updated 4 Months Ago

A human Soul exists

Toviyah
n7

Hey everyone, First round is for acceptance. A soul is defined as: "The spiritual or immaterial part of a human being, regarded as immortal" [1] BOP will be on me. This debate is impossible to accept; if you want to debate, leave a comment :) Enjoy! [1] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/soul...

Post Voting Period
43 Comments
Updated 2 Months Ago

Philosophy is Important

SeekingWisdom
Kaneo

Philosophy is still relevant. Science, as important and awesome as it is, does not, and cannot, address normative issues. There is no way to get to what we 'ought' to do, with science. What is right and what is wrong, in the area of human values, cannot be addressed by science. This is the domain of Philosophy. Science matters. The rules and findings of science reinforce philosophy. Science affirms Aristotelian philosophy - that the natural world is knowable and that man has the ability to un...

Post Voting Period
1 Comments
Updated 5 Months Ago

The Problem of Evil and Hell

Microsuck
KRFournier

Resolved: The Problem of Evil and the Problem of Hell are sucessful arguments against the existence of the Judeo-Christian type God.Clarification: This debate is not necessarily about a particular religion, rather, it an argument aganist a Judeo-Christian type God who has the three omni-attributes (omnipotence; omnibenevolence; and omniscient). RulesA. Structure1. Acceptance/abstract2. O...

Post Voting Period
43 Comments
Updated 2 Years Ago

Any attempt at arguing for the existence an infinitely-intelligent, creator god, is illogical

Zarroette
The_Scapegoat_bleats

God: A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe Omnipotence: Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful. 4 rounds, 2 week voting period, 48 hours to respond and 8k max. word rounds.

Post Voting Period
4 Comments
Updated 7 Months Ago

Burden of proof should be on both claims, not just the positive.

Musibrique
SyadieAlFawazAbdurrahman

It is often believed that the burden of proof should only lie on a person claiming a positive. That is, if I claim X exists, then it is up to me to prove that X exists because I'm the one possessing the burden of proof. This technique is widely used by atheists and skeptics. Although I do agree that the burden of proof should lie on the person making a positive claim, I also think the burden should be on those who claim the contrary. Now before I proceed the reasons why I think this way, I will...

Post Voting Period
6 Comments
Updated 5 Months Ago

Agnosticism and Atheism are mutually exclusive

janetsanders733
MysticEgg

I will be arguing that Atheism and Agnosticism are mutually exclusive. My opponent will be arguing that that they are not mutually exclusive. I would also like to thank Con for accepting this debate.Round 1: AcceptanceRound 2: Opening ArguementsRound 3: Rebuttals/Conclusion...

Post Voting Period
10 Comments
Updated 7 Months Ago