The Instigator
Semothy
Pro (for)
The Contender
DawnBringerRiven
Con (against)

A world without negative actions would negate positive ones.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Semothy has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/7/2017 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 328 times Debate No: 103832
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Semothy

Pro

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 but this does not mean they are always ecstatic or overjoyed. i.e to get an A on a test wouldn't bring the same happiness as winning a million on the lottery"

But what I was left thinking was does this then not mean for each degree of happiness is there not an equal degree of sadness? and without it's opposite is the positive null and void?

If it wasn't possible to fail a test, would a pass bring you happiness?
If you never had any reason to ever spend money on bills etc would winning more change anything?
If you could never get ill and out of shape would you feel good about working out?

So for us to enjoy whatever degree of positivity an equal negative must be just as possible. If there was an 8 on the happiness scale, would it matter if there was no -8?

Thanks for your time.
DawnBringerRiven

Con

I accept your debate. 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 the test has reminded me that I have mastered that material.
"If you never had any reason to spend money on bills etc. Would winning more change anything?"
This statement is slightly confusing. I believe you mean, "If you never had to spend money, would earning more money change anything?" Again, this ultimately depends on the individual. There are people who simply enjoy hoarding objects, no matter what purpose they serve. These specific individuals would enjoy earning more money.
"If you never get ill and out of shape, would you feel good about working out?"
Does this mean you can still improve your shape? If so, you can easily feel good about working out. In the case of staying at the same level of fitness forever, certain individuals will still enjoy exercising possibly if they have a lot of pent up energy they have no where to direct.
[2] If I enjoy tasting food, where is the negative? If our world consisted of food we only enjoyed eating, would we stop enjoying eating food? Of course not. Why? Because our tongue is wired to enjoy the taste of certain food. Your brain does not calculate the exact negative level of an event, and then give you emotions opposite of that negative. For what reason would it need to do that? I understand that there are negatives in life and overcoming those negatives makes your positive feelings stronger, but this happening commonly does not mean it is true for every time you feel an emotion.
Debate Round No. 1
Semothy

Pro

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 would never get out of shape.
money became pointless as everything was free.
you could get any job without taking any test etc.

Would people not get excited about anything if they could have everything without any negative outcomes at all?

Because there are plenty of very wealthy people who always say money does not buy them happiness, so what if having everything in the world forever, inc perfect health etc was possible and you could never have a bad date, argument, fight etc

What would make people happy?

As for the eating thing, lets take water for example. That is good for us but we don't always just have only water. Because if we have the same thing too much we get put off it or we get bored of it. But what if you never had those reactions, would you no longer also enjoy water? you would still have it to live yes, but would you enjoy it? and what if you didn't need it to live? would you still bother having it? would it not be a pointless act?
DawnBringerRiven

Con

[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 not exist. People will only have the capacity to feel positive feelings and nothing else; therefore, positives can not be negated as negatives do not exist in the first place. Positive emotions can not fade away as that would be a negative result of having no negatives.
[4] "Because plenty of very wealthy people always say money does not buy them happiness..." Most of the individuals who say this are most likely deluding themselves. If they were to suddenly go bankrupt, they could possibly be depressed to the point of suicide. http://www.businesspundit.com...
[5] "Because if we have the same thing too much we get put off it or we get bored of it" This is yet another variable that depends on the individual. There are people that exist today that are very much happy doing the same things each day for long periods of time.
[6] "But what if you never had those reactions, would you no longer also enjoy water? You would still have it to live yes, but would you enjoy it?" Yes simply because of the feeling of thirst you would enjoy drinking water. "What if you didn't need it to live? Would you still bother having it? Would it not be a pointless act?" This debate is if negatives can negate positives, you can't simply take away the positives of water to argue that having no negatives negate positives. The need to drink water makes drinking water a positive. Even in this scenario, individuals can still enjoy drinking water just as some individuals enjoy eating dirt today. Perhaps they would simply enjoy the taste of water even if it has no purpose. It being a pointless act is irrelevant as a person who would still enjoy drinking water would cause this act to no longer be pointless.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by canis 4 months ago
canis
There is only action and reaction. Negative and positive does not exist.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.