The Instigator
Georgiaheartandsoul
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ajabi
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

Country life is better than city life

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 3 votes the winner is...
Ajabi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/20/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,259 times Debate No: 62006
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

Georgiaheartandsoul

Pro

City people say that country life sucks but how would they know? I love country life.

There will be five rounds
You will have 72 hours to argue
Te voting period is 3 days
Ajabi

Con

I accept this challenge. Having never once even visited the country, or even ever camped I can say I love my city life, and it would be interesting to see it atacked.
Debate Round No. 1
Georgiaheartandsoul

Pro

1.there is a lot of wide open spaces and you don't have many neighbors. It's very peaceful and quiet and beautiful.
2.we have the advantage that we can raise our own food.that way we know what in it and it tastes better than store bought food. We don't have to worry about hormones going into our beef or anything.
3. We own lots of land. My grandparents own around 300 acres
4. We can go hunt whatever we want as long as its in season. One of my family traditions is to go squirrel hunting on thanksgiving
5. Mudbogging!!!! Bet you can't do THAT in the city. If you don't what it is, look it up.
Ajabi

Con

I thank the Proposition for this challenge. I should start off by analyzing the motion in terms of onus. The onus here, rests entirely upon the Proposition. It is their responsibility to show, beyond doubt, that country life is better than city life. This requires two things: a. for them to be able to create an objective quantifier, b. for them to show that according to this objective quantifier country life is better than city life. I need not state that city life is better, that is not my burden. I need only negate my opponent's resolution. I will therefore argue against the first assumption: that there exists an objective quantifier. I will attempt to argue from the point of view that absolute statements cannot be given, or should not be given in such circumstances, and that there are people who may favor country life, and those who may favor city life. One last note, to apply this objective quantifier my opponent will have to use comparison between the two lifestyles, something s/he never did.

Let us start with the counter-arguments. For the first point I see no reasoning why this may be a good thing. I for one personally enjoy having close by communities, with close knit societies. There really is not any particular noise in my society either, so I do not see the universality of this point. You will find many houses in the city which are also quite spatial, and you have plenty of room. My father has Diabetes, I remember I was young, and my father fell very sick and if a close by neighbor did not hear me cry, my father would be dead today. Here is a family who love their neighbors very much.

On the second point I see no sources to support that the food tastes better, nor do I see how it is an advantage. Especially since (being handicapped) walking for me is hard enough, how will I ever bend and do labor? I have no brothers, and sisters, and my parents are both suffering from either Diabetes or Blood Pressure. On a second note you can also buy pure, organic food in the city.[1]

The third point is rather silly, my opponent is assuming that everyone is rich in the rural areas. This seems quite elitist to me; I also do not see how s/he supposes this is an advantage which everyone can have?

Once more there are many people who may not like hunting, and if they do there are resorts that one can go to. Quite frankly I think if anyone hunts a squirrel they should be hanged publicly. It is a rather disgusting thing to do, unless of course you are going to eat the squirrel. If it is not recreational hunting, and for meat then one can buy meat from stores.

The last thing also seems rather ridiculous because my opponent seems to insinuate that they do that every day, even if they do, it would get boring. Not to mention it is dangerous. I would not want to do it, and if anyone does I see no good reason why they could not go for a vacation.

Contrast this with city life which as, on average, 30% better job support, schools are on average (statistics based on United Kingdom, Scotland, and Ireland) 20 minutes closer, hospitals 34 minutes closer, and I do not know what GP is but it is 8 minutes closer on average.[2] The lifestyle is often better, where there are less chances of catching diseases, you have more modern hospitals, and a more advanced outlook to life.[3] In 2012 it was shown that students who live in the city have a higher rate by 30 percentile in examinations, if compared to country life.[2 again]

I do not feel the need to expand more right now, as my opponent has the burden of proof.

[1]http://www.shoporganic.com...
[2]file:///C:/Users/Abu%20l'%20Ajab/Downloads/rt43ruralurbanarea_tcm77-221319.pdf (Rural and urban areas: comparing lives using rural/urban classifications By Tim Pateman, Office for National Statistics)
[3]http://www2.eur.nl...
Debate Round No. 2
Georgiaheartandsoul

Pro

First of all, I did not assume that everyone in rural areas are rich. In fact, we are FAR from rich but we aren't poor either. My poppa bought his land a little at a time. I did not say he bought it all at once.
As for my point that homegrown food tastes better, I have no proof except that I have eaten store bought beef and tomatoes and to me and the rest of my family, homegrown tastes much better.
And yes, we do eat the squirrels we shoot. We don't hunt and then dump the stuff we shot. Everything we shoot we eat. At least most people.
Mud bogging is not dangerous. At least not to me.

"The lifestyle is often better, where there are less chances of catching diseases, you have more modern hospitals, and a more advanced outlook to life"
My opponent seems to imply that we don't have proper healthcare or technology here. But in fact, our hospitals and technology are just as modern and advanced as the people's in the cities. Also, the chances of catching diseases are just the same. Just because we live out in the woods, or a field doesn't mean we catch diseases easier.
I will also point out that without country people, and farmers, you would not have fresh produce in grocery stores. You might point out that I said that homegrown food is better than the food you buy in stores. Well it is. Just farmers who sell to grocery stores in the city often put hormones in their beef and vegetables.
Ajabi

Con

At this point I would say I have won this debate because my opponent has never "compared" something essential to his/her argumentation. Furthermore not all of my points were discussed. In any case though I thank Georgiaheartandsoul for his/her round.

1. This still does not show that everyone would be able to buy that land. Also I see no reason why extra land equals better life.

2. Personal proofs do not really count, since you cannot prove here that food self-grown tastes better, this point fails.

3. I see no reason why shooting, or mud bogging cannot be done on vacations, and how they equal an objectively better life style.

4. Being from Pakistan I am aware that county life has hospitals, and schools. It has all forms of technology, sure, but not to the level of city life. I gave sources as to how children in city life do better, something never answered. My opponent will however agree that there are more schools, and hospitals in the city. As my source shows they are closer by, and hence city life is better because the diseases are also fewer.
Debate Round No. 3
Georgiaheartandsoul

Pro

Georgiaheartandsoul forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Georgiaheartandsoul

Pro

Georgiaheartandsoul forfeited this round.
Ajabi

Con

I win this debate because my opponent never gave counter-rebuttals to my contentions on his/her argument. I win this debate because my analysis of city life having more utility was never responded to. I extend all contentions.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by NoahMuns 2 years ago
NoahMuns
Con has no idea how great the country is, I live on a ranch in the mountains which is very similar to the country but mountains are a tad better. City people just don't understand the happiness you get when you drop you first buck or go on your first 8 week backpacking trip. You can't obtain this from a store your just born with a desire to be in the wilderness all the time
Posted by Ajabi 2 years ago
Ajabi
LINK 2: http://ebookbrowsee.net...

THIS IS THE LINK 2 OF MY DEBATE, THE LINK IN THE DEBATE IS INCORRECT, PLEASE FIND DOCUMENT HERE!
Posted by Dookieman 2 years ago
Dookieman
I like this debate. I will be sure to vote when it's over.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
I live in country. An alarm company called my daughter, who lives a few miles away, and asked her if she would let them come out and demonstrate their burglar alarm system.She said she does not need one. Everyone out here owns a gun.
Posted by LogicalLunatic 2 years ago
LogicalLunatic
Ey! Im from da Big Appul an da countree hicks ain't knowing how'ta spell!
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
I agree with pro. But fun debate topic.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
GeorgiaheartandsoulAjabiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by republicofdhar 2 years ago
republicofdhar
GeorgiaheartandsoulAjabiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: It's a simple win. Pro missed out on too many points, and Con did a good job of putting forth his case, even though, I feel, the BoP was completely on Pro, who was making the case.
Vote Placed by Defro 2 years ago
Defro
GeorgiaheartandsoulAjabiTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF