The Instigator
NzAnti
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
beem0r
Pro (for)
Winning
33 Points

Do High school councilors really care?

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/4/2008 Category: Education
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,645 times Debate No: 2411
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (14)

 

NzAnti

Con

Well I'm new at this, and have been reading a lot of debates on this site, so I thought I would join and make my own.

Do councilors really care?

I don't think they do. Now think about the average high school councilor, they go to work, get paid (which is probley the only reason they even do it) and feed the same bullshit advice to every annoying teenager out there seeking attention. Do they really care?

I mean, think of a councilor who has been working at a high school for years.. They would get completely desensitized and slowly begin to just not care about all the littlie problems every teenager has.

So what's your intake?
beem0r

Pro

High school councelors do care about the well being of the students they speak with. Con has asserted that the only reason concelors go to work is becausee they need money. However, let's consider why one would ever become a councelor in the first place...

Since there really isn't hard evidence for us to deal with, I'll go ahead and offer a story from my own life. A few years back, I decided I wanted to become a teacher. Why did I decide this? Because I'm concerned with the state of education. Because I feel that the next generation could use good teachers, and I feel that I'm one of the best canndidates for that. It's not because I know there's going to be a lot of money in it for me (hint: there's not). I'd think it would be a similar tale for counselors. If a person was truly solely concerned with the amount of money they'd make, they wouldn't go into the education system.

However, I think my opponent might accept the previous statement and assert instead that perhaps they once cared, but their constant contact with the same problems has 'desensitized' them to the point where they no longer care.

However, I believe that would be mincing words. Desensitation does not imply a lack of feeling, just a lack of reaction. for instance, I have seen quite a few disgusting photos in my day - gross, gruesome, etc. However, when I see a picture of a dead body, I still feel emotion. I simply have learned to deal with that emotion, ergo rather than freaking out over it I simply move on.

Since this is 3 rounds, and I see this as a debate with little possible content, I'll save anything else for later and allow my opponent to respond.
Debate Round No. 1
NzAnti

Con

First I would like to thank beem0r for accepting this debate. Like I said, I'm new to this, but I shall try my best to debate in this subject.

And yes, this is quite an awkward debate considering there's not really any proper evidence out there, to back any of this up from both sides.

~~~~~A few years back, I decided I wanted to become a teacher. Why did I decide this? Because I'm concerned with the state of education.~~~~~

Yes, I do believe some, and probley the majority, of councilors would do generally care a lot. And do accept the job because they are worried about the youth these days, or have had some decent experiences they would like to share with the youth.

But I'm saying the majority of them would pick the job just for the money, as the majority of people out there for any job would do.

According to "http://www.answers.com...;
Desensitize: To render insensitive or less sensitive.

And as the majority of councilors in high schools would get sick of dealing with every teenagers problems, everyday, for countless hours, as anyone would. And they, after a long period of time, will become less sensitive, and less caring to every problem every teenager would rant on to them about.

After all, even you would feel the same way if you had been doing the job for a while, correct?
beem0r

Pro

So we're in agreement that counselors generally do care when they take up the job.

The difference in our viewpoints is this: you believe that dealing with the kids and their problems every day breeds desensitization and therefore they would stop caring. I believe you simply lack an understanding of what desensitization is. And to be clear, the definition you posted is valid.

Let's say a brand new counselor, first day on the job, talks to a kid who is having a horrible experience at home. Something really bad. The counselor, just like any other person hearing the tale, would feel a great deal of empathy for the person. Perhaps so much so that the counselor is unable to keep his/her otherwise calm and collected nature. Either way, the reaction, whether internal or external, would be pretty big, since such a horrible tale would be a big 'wow' for a new counselor.

However, a more experienced counselor who has seen it all wouldn't have this wow effect. They wouldn't be surprised or startled by the horrible news, as they've dealt with similar things many times in the past. HOWEVER, this in no way means that they no longer care about the student. The empathy is still there, and always will be, unless we're talking about a psychopath counselor.

Using your logic, almost every profession does not care about their work. I would agree that there are a number of professions that generally don't care about their work, but only because their jobs are unimportant or meaningless. I'd wager that the majority of workers in certain fields in fact do care about their work: scientists, teachers, doctors, counselors, clergy, actors, artists, musicians, photographers, chefs, game producers, etc. Basically, any job that people go into _because_ they care about it. Janitors probably don't really care about places they clean. Generic factory workers probably don't truly care about the goods they help produce.

I reject the idea that working with something for a long time makes people stop caring about what they do. They might not be quite as excited about it as they were in the beginning, but I don't think it can be said that they simply stop caring. At least not truthfully.

Just as a historian who's studied the holocaust in great depth for many years doesn't feel any less empathy for the victims of the holocaust, a high-school counselor who's dealt with students' problems in great depth for many years doesn't feel any less empathy for the students. There is less of a wow factor involved, but that is all that's different.
Debate Round No. 2
NzAnti

Con

But still, I'm sure everyone reading this would defiantly think that after years of being a high school councilor, They would be less sensitive and caring, and have more of a "get over your problem" attitude, Though they wont say it, They would defiantly think something like that.

>>>>>However, a more experienced counselor who has seen it all wouldn't have this wow effect. They wouldn't be surprised or startled by the horrible news, as they've dealt with similar things many times in the past. HOWEVER, this in no way means that they no longer care about the student. The empathy is still there, and always will be, unless we're talking about a psychopath counselor.<<<<<

Yes, Empathy would still be there, but not as much empathy as a councilor who has been working with students for years would have to students. A councilor working there for years would be slightly less caring, and less surprised of every problem students come up to them and cry about.

Id still say the majority of experienced councilors will, and probley have in the past, be less caring, then they were when they started the job. And would just hang in there just for the money.

>>>>>Just as a historian who's studied the holocaust in great depth for many years doesn't feel any less empathy for the victims of the holocaust, a high-school counselor who's dealt with students' problems in great depth for many years doesn't feel any less empathy for the students. There is less of a wow factor involved, but that is all that's different.<<<<<

I've course there would be a less wow factor. People can get used to, and adapt to any situation. But after years, there WOULD be some sort of slight desensitization, and a less caring factor, after years of working in the hands of a councilor.

People in there lives, must have had some sought of desensitization, a situation where they are left less caring to something. I know I have.

For instance say you had a friend who has a relative, who died recently. And they were upset, they shared there feelings with you, etc etc. But after a while, and I mean quite a while, possibly of repetition, of them going on and on and moping about it, your attitude would change.. To more of a less caring state. You would think "oh get over it" rather then your usual thinking pattern which would might be like something like "aww that poor person."

And I'm sure people have had some sort of experiences just like the one I just stated, or similar to that. I know I have.

That is all, Thank you and good luck :)
beem0r

Pro

Annoyance and caring are not mutually exclusive. As you brought up, it would probably annoy anyone if their friends kept going on and on about the same problem. However, the fact that we'd get annoyed after a while doesn't mean we stop caring. A better example:

One of your friends is massively obsessed with helping starving Africans. Every day, they talk to you at least once about it. While this would piss off most people, but I don't think most people would stop caring about the problem of starvation in Africa because of it. They would simply be annoyed that their friend routinely brings it up. Annoyance of repetition does not necessitate a lack of caring for the subject at hand.

I suppose I'll close by holding that those who go into the high school counseling field do in fact care when they go into the field (we've both agreed on this) and that they do not stop caring about kids simply because they deal with a lot of them. Simply suggesting otherwise does not change this.

My opponent has simply suggested that counselors would probably get sick of dealing with kids and therefore would stop caring because of this. I believe he has failed to meet the burden of proof with this: mere speculation is not enough. Since we've both agreed that counselors usually care when they go into the business and unsubstantial proof has been given that they stop caring down the road, I believe I can justly hold that they remain caring throughout their careers as counselors.

I suppose it's off to the voters with that.
Thanks for the debate, it was fun.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by johnrasheed 9 years ago
johnrasheed
I would have to say its not that they dont care, they are just here to make shure that the students have the classes that the students are suppose to have. It might be some that do but me as a student think that they dont that my oppion.
Posted by FunkeeMonk91 9 years ago
FunkeeMonk91
Well, it's impossible to prove whether counselors care or not. However, if you had chose, "Counselors Should Care" then I would have taken your up on this one.
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by JUDGE 9 years ago
JUDGE
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by THEmanlyDEBATER3 9 years ago
THEmanlyDEBATER3
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by polka-dots323 9 years ago
polka-dots323
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by Sanchez 9 years ago
Sanchez
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by Grandma 9 years ago
Grandma
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by bigbass3000 9 years ago
bigbass3000
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by PreacherFred 9 years ago
PreacherFred
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by DJBruce 9 years ago
DJBruce
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by SportsGuru 9 years ago
SportsGuru
NzAntibeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03