The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

All people should read books

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/13/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 924 times Debate No: 65070
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)




Format: round one accept, round two debate subject


I accept this argument and will be arguing that NOT all people should read books.
My main arguments on the subject will be

Not all people CAN read books, therefore making it an impossible expectation.
I am generally a believer in free choice and free will, thus the pro argument itself totally removes both.
Reading can cause a restricted and misinformed view.
Reading can infact stunt natural creativity.
Reading can cause the reader to become dependant on the "book"

I will attempt to give a full argument for each in next round, as long as PRO is happy to proceed with all the above points.
Debate Round No. 1


To address your first argument, people that can not read should learn to. I'm guessing everyone that can't read has had a chance to learn once in their life. For your second argument reading books is not taking away your free will or choice. For your third argument, why would it cause restricted and misinformed view, in fact I think it would do the opposite you read newspapers, historic books wouldn't it give you an enlightened view? Your fourth argument, reading can stunt natural creativity? Well you can tell that's not true because you can read and you came up with this argument. And for your last argument, reading can cause the reader to become dependent on the "book" people don't live to read. I read and I'm not taking my book every where and depend upon it for water, food, happiness, and housing. I believe reading is not a escape from realty but a door to imagination.

Thank you and good luck


I'm not arguing that books are bad. I'm arguing with the ambiguity of the statement 'ALL PEOPLE SHOULD READ BOOKS'
I would like to address the arrogance of pro's statement ' people who cannot read should learn too' those who cannot read are at a huge disadvantage and dont merely choose to, there are many medical reasons for the inability to read such as dyslexia, physical/mental disability as well as sociological factors.
My next argument has been misinterpreted, the 'statement' takes away free choice/will, by concluding that ALL should read, you are dictating and forcing your own subjective opinions upon them, if a person chooses not to read it is there right not to.
ACADEMIC SNOBBERY being well read does'nt equate with being knowledgeable, the statement is looking down on those who don't read as being less intelligent and holding academic prowess above learned life skill.
The capability to think for yourself without use of written opinion of another, dependence only on books is bad
Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by cb123 2 years ago
I would like to have added much more to this debate but due to the ridiculous word/argument limit was unfortunately unable to.
Posted by blackkid 2 years ago
It's weird that Con won.
Posted by Mr.Lee 2 years ago
Wait, People don't read books? What is wrong with you?!?!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Anakin 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Funny, I agreed with Pro before the argument but i agreed with Pro after (maybe) even tho he gave no real reason to why. Just because something sounds arrogance doesn't make it incorrect. people should read books. Everything they need to know is in some form of a book, instructions, etc. But the Con gave much better points, that I do partly agree with
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: tying because although pro sufficiently rebuts con, he himself makes no good case towards why we should read books.