All Big Issues
The Instigator
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points

# All Races are equal

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
bengrf
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 4/3/2014 Category: Politics Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 1,564 times Debate No: 51565
Debate Rounds (4)

 Con The burden of proof lies onto my opponent since 'All races are equal' is a positive statement. Don't worry this is not going to be about semantics so i'm gone go a step further than just stating the obvious that we are different . Report this Argument Pro Definitions: Race: Each of the major divisions of humankind, having distinct physical characteristics. Equal: A comparison of worth that stats 2 or more things have and indistinguishable total worth; note .9999 repeating and 1 have and indistinguishable value and are thereby equal. Observation: As we are speaking to race here we must acknowledge the fact that we are speaking to populations not individuals. Any argument that basis itself upon individual inequity therefor cannot stand; however, the effect upon individuals is valid when looking to the acceptance or rejection of the resolution. Contention 1: Situation at calamity displays equality Only when calamity is reached is a notable value difference between anything realized. During disaster choosing an equal number of each race for anything would be the most logical step, as evolution through natural selection has determined that each race is physically and mentally the most viable candidate available for long term human survival in each region that each particular race dominates. Therefor, upon a disaster, where value differences would be realized, no value differences are distinguishable and therefor races are equal. Contention 2: Intrinsic value of life As the value of life can only be asserted by living beings the value of life must be intrinsic or life would extinguish itself. If races are unequal, then the existence of one race must be intrinsically more valuable than the existence of another. Thus I challenge my opponent to create a list of more valuable and less valuable races. Contention 3: Acceptance is necessary for a moral and stable society In practicality negation is unsustainable for civilization. If races are not equal, then each race will believe that they are naturally superior to any other race. When two races who believe there are each superior to the other then conflict would arise. Historical examples are the French"German enmity and the Sino-Japanese Wars. If one side completely dominates the other genocide and slavery are likely results. Historical examples are slavery and Jim Crow in the United States, the Holocaust, and The Rwandan genocide. Thus for a stable society it is necessary to believe that all races are equal, else conflict follows.Report this Argument Con 'Contention 1: Situation at calamity displays equality ' ' upon a disaster, where value differences would be realized, no value differences are distinguishable and therefor races are equal.' you are talking about a paticular scenario in which we do not live in in therefore it is irrational to assume that we are equal just because in a paticular scenario we would be equally worthy in and also my opponent doesn't understand that even though we are equally worhty in the situation we are not 'equal' meaning the same since we differ in many issues , intelligence and strenght only being 2 out of my many . 'Contention 2:Instrinsic value of life' 'then the existence of one race must be intrinsically more valuable than the existence of another.' Yes indeed . 'Thus I challenge my opponent to create a list of more valuable and less valuable races.' racial inequality is one of my controversial views that I only adapted like a few weeks ago and I do not feel enlightened enough to create such a list however I can show you something else . Source comes from http://www.harbornet.com...; and on page 9 of the book that is in the link ive sent you there is a table of different traits different races have , I will copy and paste the first bit about the brain `Trait Blacks Whites Orientals Brain Size: Cranial capacity 1,267 1,347 1,364 Cortical neurons (millions) 13,185 13,665 13,767` `Bigger brains have more brain cells and this leads to higher IQs. The races vary in brain size. The Collaborative Perinatal Project followed more than 35,000 children from birth to seven years. Orientals had larger brains than Whites at birth, four months, one year, and seven years. Whites had larger brains than Blacks at all ages . If you are asking me personally I believe Whites and Asians (also possibly ashknazi jews ) are the most developed races . ' Contention 3: Acceptance is necessary for a moral and stable society' My opponent makes the claim that we need to accept members of other races , and now this debate is not about equal rights therefore I do not feel the need to respond to this in detail since I myself believe in equal rights , My opponents claim is that of we should not even consider races being different because it might cause war , but lets not forget the so called wars that were the result of racism where usually the result of chauvinism ( a form of extreme nationalism ) and the Hitler example is not legitimate since he was a fascist and that's where his appeal to war comes from . I don't think in the modern days something like the holocaust can happen without somebody finding out . I thank my opponent and I await his reponse The more north the people went "Out of Africa," the harder it was to get food, gain shelter, make clothes, and raise children. So the groups that evolved into today's Whites and Orientals needed larger brains, more family stability, and a longer life. But building a bigger brain takes time and energy during a person's development. So, these changes were balanced by slower rates of growth, lower levels of sex hormones, less aggression, and less sexual activity. ` Report this Argument Pro I would like to start with some concessions of my opponent. My opponent dropped my definitions and observation meaning we must look at this debate within these parameters.Also my opponent chose to forgo his ability to make a case which means only one of my contentions needs to be true to show races being equal. Contention 1: My opponent makes the mistake that hypotheticals are irrelevancies. My opponent dropped the statement that only when calamity is reached is a notable value difference between anything released. Therefore values of people are differentiated in the hypothetical. With equality being a measure of worth and as my opened said "though we are equally worhty in the situation" and per the definition of equality that my opponent submitted to this would support the idea that all races are equal. Contention 2: My opponent offered data with a link that I cannot open so I request that my opponent share the credentials of the source. Also my opponent states that races are superior to others but fails to show a distinguishable difference in worth per definition of equality, as higher IQ does not necessarily translate into superior people morally, physically, or any of the other aspects that make a person, therefore the challenge stands. Contention 3: My opponent misses the main point of the contention as my contention was not about equal rights but perceived superiority. People will believe that they are superior to others and they will act on it strongest historical examples are Rwandan and Bosnian genocides . My opponent states that the war was caused by chauvinism but the cause of chauvinism is neglected. The cause is perceived superiority over others which will be created by the negation.Report this Argument Con SebUK forfeited this round. Pro As my opponent forfeited his previous round I would just like to tie all my contentions together. I have put forth for a stable society equality between races is necessary else violence occurs and this should stand as the biggest reason to accept that all races are equal because any other conclusion would be detrimental to humans in the long run. When coupled with the idea that each race is best candidate for survival in the part of the world with the race evolved we see the each race to its own is a true statement however going so far to say that the races are unequal means devaluing one or more aspects of the human race. Due to my opponet forfeiting his round I have no more to recant or to clash against so I shal end my round.Report this Argument Con Sorry but I am currently abroad and cannot continue this debate that's why I will not make any counter arguments .Report this Argument Pro bengrf forfeited this round.
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by SebUK 4 years ago
two*
Posted by SebUK 4 years ago
'Do you mean equally intelligent? Do you mean equal in physical ability?' Yes these too .
Posted by briantheliberal 4 years ago
Can you specify what you mean by "equal" ?
Posted by philochristos 4 years ago
You ought to at least say what you mean by "equal." Do you mean equal in value and worth? Do you mean equally adapted to their environment? Do you mean equally intelligent? Do you mean equal in physical ability? Do you mean equal in number? Do you mean equal average economic prosperity? Do you mean equal in virtue and vice? Or do you mean equal in some combination of these things?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.