DDO is similar to a social network
Debate Rounds (3)
The opponent argues that DDO (debate.org, the site you are currently on) is "similar to a social network."
This is plainly false. Allow me to elaborate.
Social Network - "An online community of people with a common interest who use a website or other technologies to communicate with each other and share information, resources, etc." 
It is clear that DDO is a social network. We are all brought together as an online community with the common interest of "debate", as the opponent as admitted. Furthermore, we spend a great deal of time communicating with one another and sharing information.
Similar - "almost the same as someone or something else" 
Almost - "only a little less than" 
The definition of similar clearly dictates that for two objects to be similar, they have to be almost the same, but objectively different by "only a little". Considering that DDO is a social network, it cannot be said that DDO is "similar" to a social network, because that would imply that DDO itself is not a social network.
I'll formulate this as a syllogism.
Premise 1: DDO is a social network. [Definition of social network.]
Premise 2: Two similar objects must differ by "a little". [Definition of similar.]
Inference 1: DDO and a "social network" do not differ by a little. [By P1.]
Conclusion: DDO and a "social network" are not similar.
I have clearly demonstrated that DDO is not similar to a social network, since it is exactly a social network. Points to Con, thanks for reading.
1 - http://www.dictionary.com...
2 - http://www.merriam-webster.com...
3 - http://www.merriam-webster.com...
The opponent has made a few claims. These are:
1. No "typical" social network is made only for debating.
2. No "typical" social network has elections for president.
3. Not every social network is made for a common interest, a la Facebook/Twitter.
I'll address each of these individually, then detail why my argument still stands.
No "typical" social network is made only for debating.
I assume by "typical", the opponent is referring to the average. In the case of social networks, it doesn't even make sense to think in terms of "average".
Consider the following list:
Felix - Brown
Bob - Orange
Margaret - Calico
Tom - Gray
Rufus - Black
Now, what is the "average" color? Of course, you cannot determine an average or "typical" color because "color" is not a numerical value and cannot be mathematically operated on.
Similarly, the "type" of social network follows the same logic. Some are purely for interpersonal communication, some are for "debate", some are for "cars" and some are for "humor". It does not make sense to describe the "average type of social network" because the very nature of "type" does not allow for mathematical averaging.
Given this, it is clear that the opponent's point is meaningless. Of course DDO is not a "typical social network" -- no social network is "typical". Even if we found conversion that allowed us to convert "type" into a numerical value, we would still expect DDO to be "atypical", since in any distribution with a sufficient number of discrete values, the majority of values are not average.
No typical social network has elections for President.
Again, this is a meaningless point by the logic mentioned above. If anything, this simply highlights the social nature of what we do here, thus reinforcing my claim that DDO is exactly a social network.
Not every social network is made for a common interest.
This is false. The error here is assuming that the "common interest" must be extremely specific, as is the case in DDO, where the interest is "debate".
On more popular social networks like Facebook and Twitter, the common interest is simply "the desire to share your opinions, memories and thoughts", which is precisely the function of these social networks.
Clearly if a social network was released that did not appeal to a common interest, it would not be used by any more than one person, meaning there would be no "social activities" taking place, meaning it could not be defined as a social network.
I've demonstrated that the opponent's counter-points are either meaningless or irrelevant.
In the first round, I clearly proved that by definition DDO is a social network. I finished by proving that by definition DDO cannot be "similar" to a social network, since DDO is exactly a social network.
Thanks for reading.
Felix - Brown
Bob - Orange
Margaret - Calico
Tom - Gray
Rufus - Black
Cats also have some similarities, such as most of them drink milk and their bodies are similar to other cats.
Some people use facebooks for propaganda, others for jokes, for educational purposes etc. There is common interest as such in these sites.
The opponent's response is short and not entirely cogent. I'll attempt to respond, then sum up the round with some voters.
"Cats also have some similarities [to other cats], such as most of them drink milk and their bodies are similar to other cats."
My point had nothing to do with cats -- I was just using animals colors as an example as to why you can't average qualitative characterstics. This was harkening to the point about "DDO being atypical" in terms of social networks.
Notably, you can approach a level of specificity such that the term "similar" can be applied. For example, a Persian Cat is similar to a Bengal cat. This is an appropriate usage of the term "similar", since you are comparing two different objects.
It does not a correct usage to say "cats are similar to cats", since both objects are the same. That is the case in the resolution in question. Since DDO is a social network, it does not make sense to say "DDO is similar to a social network".
"Some people use facebooks [sic] for propoganda, others for jokes, for educational purposes etc. There is a common interest as such in these sites."
The opponent candidly admits that there is a common interest in Facebook, which was my entire point. Facebook is a social network by definition. DDO is a social network by definition.
I have demonstrated that DDO is a social network, meaning that it cannot be similar to a social network, since two identical objects can never be similar, by the definition of similar.
In order for the opponent's position to be true, DDO would need to be "a little different" than a social network. I have shown that DDO perfectly fits the definition of a social network, meaning it is not "a little different" than a social network. Had the opponent claimed "DDO is similar to Facebook", then he would be exactly correct. But because he used the general term "social network", he fails to maintain his position.
Thanks for reading and please vote Con.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Mysery 4 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Con's use of dictionary definitions demonstrated solid use of logical reasoning. By proving that DDO exactly fits the definition of "social network" then providing the definition of "similar" to require slight differences, Con logically proves that DDO is not similar to a social network, by the definitions of the words. Pro was forced to switch sides and attempt to find a difference between DDO and other social networks, but Con proved the "typical" differences Pro found were meaningless when it comes to the actual definitions. Pro's last argument admitted Con's previous points and otherwise focused on exploring an analogy Con later explains is not literally relevant to the argument.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.