The Instigator
Policydebaterspydir
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Lupricona
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Can Virtue Be Defined

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/6/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 594 times Debate No: 87407
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (15)
Votes (0)

 

Policydebaterspydir

Con

Can Virtue Be Defined?

I will take the position that Virtue cannot be defined.

This is an debate taken straight from Plato's Meno.

First Round: Accpetance
Second Round: First Constructive
Third Round: Second Constructive
Fourth Round: First Rebuttal (no new arguments)
Fith Round: Second Rebttal (No new areguemnts, summation of debate)

Accepting means you will take the position that virtue can be defined. Please start out your acceptance with your first defenition and support of it. Thank you.
Lupricona

Pro

Thank you, Policydebaterspydir, for allowing me to have this debate with you.

I accept the terms and look forward to an engaging debate and discussion on the nature of virtue.

I will start with my definition with virtue:

First, virtue is linked with ontology and teleology. What I mean by this is that, the first cause of the universe, of all existing things, is necessarily an uncaused cause. This entity causes all other things to exist, so through it's existence (ontology), everything is created to exist (teleology).

Virtue is a principle that always is aligned with the purpose of all life- existence, or continual existence.

Some examples: It is virtuous to prevent people from dying, because this is choosing existence, rather than destruction. It is virtuous to obey the Creator, so that you will live eternally. It is virtuous to eat healthy, because that creates a healthier body that will exist longer.

So, with this understanding of virtue, all correct moral choices can be decided very easily.

This was my brief explanation of my position, and will be expanded upon much more in the second and third rounds.

I look forward to the rest of the debate. Cheers!
Debate Round No. 1
Policydebaterspydir

Con

Policydebaterspydir forfeited this round.
Lupricona

Pro

Lupricona forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Policydebaterspydir

Con

Policydebaterspydir forfeited this round.
Lupricona

Pro

Lupricona forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Policydebaterspydir

Con

Policydebaterspydir forfeited this round.
Lupricona

Pro

Lupricona forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Policydebaterspydir

Con

Policydebaterspydir forfeited this round.
Lupricona

Pro

Lupricona forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Policydebaterspydir 9 months ago
Policydebaterspydir
"First, virtue is linked with ontology and teleology. What I mean by this is that, the first cause of the universe, of all existing things, is necessarily an uncaused cause. This entity causes all other things to exist, so through it's existence (ontology), everything is created to exist (teleology)."

(Im not trying to destroy your arguemnt) are you saying that god is the cause of virtue?
Posted by Lupricona 9 months ago
Lupricona
@Policydebaterspydir, actually, I do not match your age/rank criteria for the debate, so I am not able. If you would either like to alter the criteria so I can accept, or just send me the challenge to debate personally, I would gladly accept.

And of course, I fully understand it's a debate where you'll be criticizing my position, I just tend to use the word conversation for debates as a way of making them more about searching for truth, and not just unchanging binary positions.
Posted by Policydebaterspydir 9 months ago
Policydebaterspydir
@lupircona, I allow you to accept the debate, even though there is no way to stop you.

I forgot to mention something in my openining,

The main point of the debate is to not to arrive at a definition of virtue. Your job, Lupircona, is to find a definition of virtue, and then support your reasoning. The debate is really rigged in my favor, because all i have to do is show that virtue cannot be defined, so I apoligize in advance. However, it still should be fun. I don't care about who wins, I only care about arriving at the truth.
Posted by Lupricona 9 months ago
Lupricona
@Policydebaterspydir. I would agree to those terms, and if you would allow me to accept the debate, then I would hope to have an engaging and challenging conversation about virtue!
Posted by Policydebaterspydir 9 months ago
Policydebaterspydir
@the james. I actually am talking about virtue in it's true essence. I'm not talking about the standard of morality that virtue is built upon.
I am looking for a simple, objective definition of virtue.
Posted by Policydebaterspydir 9 months ago
Policydebaterspydir
@lupircona. I understand what you mean. i just wanted two rounds to really solidify my arguments. If you don't want to follow it exactly and treat rounds 3-5 as rebuttals, feel free.
Posted by thejames 9 months ago
thejames
The term 'Virtue' refers to a standard of high moral behaviour. My guess is that the instigator is referring to the actual standard of morality which the concept of virtue is built upon and not that virtue as a concept cannot be defined.

The question is where to look for that standard. Rebellion and obedience to the God creator is the objective, transcendent standard of morality which virtue the correct concept of virtue is based upon.

People were made in the image of God, and as such inherited this faculty for perceiving morality, and thus; virtue. When Eve ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, she chose her personal standard (knowledge) of morality (good and evil) which all her descendants have inherited. All disagreements of opinion can be traced back to different personnel standards of good and evil.

The instigators moral faculty comes from his being made in God's image. His stance that virtue cannot be defined comes from not knowing his creator.
Posted by Lupricona 9 months ago
Lupricona
I would like to debate this.

Also, I am confused by what you mean for the second and third rounds being only constructive. I can understand one round being used for a full description of one's position, but why two rounds? And would one not be able to make comments on the others statements at all during those rounds?
Posted by Policydebaterspydir 9 months ago
Policydebaterspydir
Ceaser, I think you miss the point of this debate, I am saying that virtue cannot be defined, so by defenition I am assuming there is no defenition. For me to give a definition would be to forfiet the round.
Posted by Ceaser_6.0 9 months ago
Ceaser_6.0
please write what you think virtue is
No votes have been placed for this debate.