The Instigator
truthiskey
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
anonymous33321
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Are humans born evil?

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 1 vote the winner is...
truthiskey
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/5/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 846 times Debate No: 48446
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

truthiskey

Pro

Rules:

1st round: acceptance and definitions ONLY
2nd round: Arguments/contentions/points/assertions ONLY
3rd round:Arguments/contentions/points/assertions AND Rebuttal
4th round: rebuttal ONLY
5th round:closing, summikng up and imact only

Definitions can also be clarified or given at any time.

Arguments can be defended at any time

No foul language or personal attacks.

Pro will try to prove the topic, while con will try to disprove it.

Forfeits count as a concession.

Failure to abide by the rules will result in a forfeit
anonymous33321

Con

Greetings to my opponent, and thank you for allowing me to debate with you. I look forward to discussing the topic of our debate, "Are humans born evil?"

I have no definitions to offer at this time, and now leave it open to my opponent to start the argument.
Debate Round No. 1
truthiskey

Pro

For this debate evil shall mean something that is immoral or causes harm

I would like to begin this video with a short video on how humans are more evil than animals

The girl could have survived, but everyone just ignored her.

C1: We enjoy Violent Forms of entertainment

Although this cartoon may seem tame, This is what our 2-5 year olds watch.

"In some ways we aren"t much different than the ancient Romans with their gladiator games and fascination with blood and gore. For instance, prime time TV is full of shoot em" up cop shows and gruesome crime scenes, most news agencies stick with the "if it bleeds, it leads" philosophy, and one of the most violent sports in existence, mixed martial arts fighting, has been dubbed the fastest growing sport in the world. Without a doubt, we have a definite attraction to violence."

We enjoy violence and love "action." Most people like the action in the movie and are not satisfied if no one dies. The older we grow, more so. That's how we grow out of Disney movies. Not enough blood.

This is clearly immoral.

C2: We are selfish

Humans are extremely selfish and if the price is high enough, they will do anything. In a recent experiment in Yale, they tested the morality of babies. There was a puppet show with a jerk and a good guy. After the show, someone would show the babies both the puppets and saw which one it chose. 70% of the babies chose the good guy. All this went out the window when a graham cracker was put into the picture. "Yes, the toddlers in the study would quickly side with a "bad guy" or be unhelpful if it meant getting three graham crackers as opposed to one. Evidently, like most adults, children can be convinced to do wrong if the price is high enough."

C3: Humans abuse power

The Stanford Prison Experiment was a simulation where a group of students gave up their rights for a prison simulation. Half of the students were made prisoners and the latter were guards. The 2-week experiment had to be stopped after a mere 6 days because the guards were tormenting the prisoners and they were breaking down. When humans are given power, they abuse it.

"I ended the study prematurely for two reasons. First, we had learned through videotapes that the guards were escalating their abuse of prisoners in the middle of the night when they thought no researchers were watching and the experiment was "off." Their boredom had driven them to ever more pornographic and degrading abuse of the prisoners."

Sources:
http://www.prisonexp.org...- Stanford Prison experiment
http://listverse.com...- 10 Reasons Why Humans are Naturally evil
anonymous33321

Con

First, I would like to remind my opponent of the topic we are arguing, which is "Are humans born evil?" It seems that throughout his argument he spoke of how adults and 2-5 year olds are watching "violent forms of entertainment." Although I completely agree with how disgusting it is that violence has been absorbed into our culture, I once again remind him that when humans are born, we do not explicitly take pleasure in violence and, as my opponent defined it, "evil."

Allow me to elaborate.

When we come into this world, we are a bare minimum of a body. Barely developed muscles, weak and fragile skin, willowy bones, and low amounts of brain power are ours to use. The thoughts and actions of a newborn-15 month old child consist mainly of the barest emotions and instinct. Are "evil" feelings even possible? I leave the question open.
Now, cartoons are a rather hard topic to debate. They are, no doubt, violent. But is our idea of "violence" in context, applicable? Doubtful. Note, how when a bomb or cute firecracker goes off underneath them, they give a cry of pain and are not "hurt?" Getting smashed in the face by an iron only provides a funny shaped face and a quick glare, and then the chase is on. Is this "violence?" Technically, yes, it truly is. Is it "evil?" No.

It is true, we do love violence, and action, and this is inexcusable. But! Do not be so hasty to think there is no scientific explanation.
We have an obnoxious gland(s) in our body that makes things called hormones. These hormones are chemicals that affect our system in many ways. For instance, smoking releases the hormone prolactin along with many others, that humans can become addicted to. Violence, releasing adrenaline, works in common way. Adrenaline is addicting to the human system. Thus, before we even come into this life, we are addicted to a hormone.
I want to clarify. HAVING AN ADDICTION TO ADRENALINE, AND THUS VIOLENCE DOES NOT MAKE YOU "EVIL." Humans are rather good at quenching their hormones and not murdering everyone on the block after watching a murder film. Thus, as my opponent defined it, "evil," or action that "cause harm" has not taken place.

"We are selfish." This is inherently true, as we have instincts that make us struggle for "survival." but, once again, we quench these feelings for what we consider "honorable," or "good." Children, toddlers, see only the graham cracker, not the implications behind it. They do not understand that they are choosing the "bad" side, only that they are rewarding themselves with a delicious treat. As we grow older, we understand more and more the implications of our actions. We understand that choosing the "bad" side is not what we should do, and resist bribery or other convincing factors.

"Humans abuse power." I bring my earlier claims to the light, first being that we accumulate violent factors over time. Also, we become dependant upon the rush we get from adrenaline, and abusing people below us gives us that, through the feeling of control that we do not feel anywhere else in our lives.

I will now close, with a quote by the world famous chess player, Gary Kasparov. "Everyone has an evil component within. It"s matter of circumstance whether it emerges. Whether he becomes "the right man in the right place at the right time" for evil to emerge. No man is inherently evil, only possessed by evil."
Debate Round No. 2
truthiskey

Pro

I'm back!

I thank my opponent for the timely response.

First, I would like to remind my opponent that THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT WHETHER HUMANS ARE EVIL OR NOT, NOT HOW MUCH THEY CAN SUPRESS EVIL.

My opponent's entire case was based on suppression of evil:

", we quench these feelings for what we consider "honorable," or "good." "
"Humans are rather good at quenching their hormones and not murdering everyone on the block after watching a murder film"

This is irrelevant to the purpose of the debate. Again, THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT WHETHER HUMANS ARE EVIL OR NOT, NOT HOW MUCH THEY CAN SUPRESS EVIL.

My opponent says:
"We have an obnoxious gland(s) in our body that makes things called hormones. These hormones are chemicals that affect our system in many ways. For instance, smoking releases the hormone prolactin along with many others, that humans can become addicted to. Violence, releasing adrenaline, works in common way. Adrenaline is addicting to the human system. Thus, before we even come into this life, we are addicted to a hormone.
I want to clarify. HAVING AN ADDICTION TO ADRENALINE, AND THUS VIOLENCE DOES NOT MAKE YOU "EVIL." "

On the contrary this hormone is what promotes violence and immoral thought. It is the source of our evil and we can't change it.

My opponent says:

"Humans are rather good at quenching their hormones and not murdering everyone on the block after watching a murder film. Thus, as my opponent defined it, "evil," or action that "cause harm" has not taken place."

My opponent disregarded the other half of my definition. I wrote that: "For this debate evil shall mean something that is immoral or causes harm." Well, enjoying people or animals getting hurt is immoral.

My opponent also concedes to the fact that we love violence:

"It is true, we do love violence, and action, and this is inexcusable."

This is exactly what I am saying. He follows this up by saying that a chemical that is part of our body makes us do it. That is correct. I am not trying to prove that we try to be evil. We actually try very hard to be good. But, our body prevents us from being good, like my opponent and I both mentioned.

He also concedes to my argument that humans abuse power using his previous hormone/adrenaline argument (which I refuted above) to justify it:

"I bring my earlier claims to the light, first being that we accumulate violent factors over time. Also, we become dependant upon the rush we get from adrenaline, and abusing people below us gives us that, through the feeling of control that we do not feel anywhere else in our lives."

Wow! Con concedes again. Another thing that we agree on. Humans immorally abuse power. I would also like to point out that he spelled dependent, "dependant."
My opponent also tries to nullify my argument about cartoon violence by saying that it is not evil:

"Now, cartoons are a rather hard topic to debate. They are, no doubt, violent. But is our idea of "violence" in context, applicable? Doubtful. Note, how when a bomb or cute firecracker goes off underneath them, they give a cry of pain and are not "hurt?" Getting smashed in the face by an iron only provides a funny shaped face and a quick glare, and then the chase is on. Is this "violence?" Technically, yes, it truly is. Is it "evil?" No."

I was using T+J as a tame example. Now, I will show you what our kids from 4+ watch every Christmas (Top right corner).

Look at how violent it is. Now, this my opponent can't deny.

Also my opponent never responded to the fact that babies are selfish.

My opponent also doesn't have any sources.

Although we try to be good, we are naturally evil.
anonymous33321

Con

anonymous33321 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 1harderthanyouthink 3 years ago
1harderthanyouthink
truthiskeyanonymous33321Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: FF