The Instigator
mgeorge3595
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
MassiveDump
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Anger

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
MassiveDump
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/22/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,153 times Debate No: 42815
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

mgeorge3595

Pro

Anger can be a good moral motivation.
MassiveDump

Con

Lack of Advantage to my Opponent's Plan.

As of right now, there is nothing wrong with our current society that would call for anger to improve it. For a vast majority of the human population, survival is a given security, and many people are looking towards pursuing a life of luxury. Furthermore, the life expectancy of the world is continuing to be on the rise. According to Michael from VSauce in 2013, the first person who will live to be one hundred and fifty years old has already been born sometime in 2010.

Lack of Inherent Barriers.

We do not need our opponent's plan to initiate anger in people, because there is no direct opposition in the government to the idea. Our current system in Washington is full of plenty of anger already, so Pro's plan is unnecessary.

Lack of Solvency in my Opponent's Plan.

"Anger solves nothing." -Ghandi, at some point in his life.

This quote strongly suggests that my opponents plan to use anger more often will make no significant change to the status quo of our current society.

Lack of... Plan.

My opponent did not present a plan, therefore Con has no current arguments necessary to be refuted.

Disadvantages to My Opponent's Plan.

1. North Korea has lots of anger. You what else North Korea has lots of? Concentration Camps.

2. Soldiers in World War I experienced a lot of anger. You what they also experienced a lot? Mustard gas.

3. Donald Duck gets angry a lot. You know what Donald Duck doesn't get a lot? Laid.

Counterplan


If people need moral motivation, they can watch American Ninja Warrior. That TV show encourages excercise, motivation, and self-esteem by showing that normal nerds like you and I can do amazing things. Anger is not needed for such a thing.

Framework

Obviously, because my opponent is proposing the plan and has made the affirmative statement, he has the burden of proof.

For these reasons and more, I urge a Con vote.

Sources

http://dafk.net...
http://jellotime.com...
http://pleasecomment.us...
http://annoyingcursor.com...
http://beefchickenpork.com...
http://onandoff.org...
http://violentpower.com...
Debate Round No. 1
mgeorge3595

Pro

mgeorge3595 forfeited this round.
MassiveDump

Con

Understanding the complexity of some people's schedules, I will allow my opponent the next round to provide a response before giving any further arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
mgeorge3595

Pro

mgeorge3595 forfeited this round.
MassiveDump

Con

Con wins.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
Specify the debate more please.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
mgeorge3595MassiveDumpTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided arguments and sources and as such grammar and source points go that way. Pro made a statement that made no sense without motivation, even though Con had some arguments that sounded more trollish than serious. Pro forfeited the debate and as such points must go to Con.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 3 years ago
KingDebater
mgeorge3595MassiveDumpTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had arguments backed up with sources and didn't forfeit.