The Instigator
socialpinko
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
vardas0antras
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points

Do objective morals exist?

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 1 vote the winner is...
vardas0antras
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/8/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,047 times Debate No: 15246
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (23)
Votes (1)

 

socialpinko

Con

My position will be that objective morals do not exist. I will give my opponent the BOP. Round 1 will be for acceptance and definitions. Rounds 2 and 3 will be for arguments and rebuttals.

Objective: of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something that is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of thought or an observer as part of reality.[1]

Morals: founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom[2]

Exist: to have actual being; be[3]

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...
[2] http://dictionary.reference.com...
[3]http://dictionary.reference.com...
vardas0antras

Pro

I accept the debate and your definitions, however, I have a request. Can we debate your points only because there's a lack of space and because we have only 24 hours to type up our arguments?
Debate Round No. 1
socialpinko

Con

socialpinko forfeited this round.
vardas0antras

Pro

Lewis says it the best, heck, I would just put shame with my wording so I'll present my argument in the form of a quote.

"Quarreling means trying to show that the other man is in the wrong. And there would be no sense in trying to do that unless you and he had some sort of agreement as to what Right and Wrong are; just as there would be no sense in saying that a footballer had committed a foul unless there was some agreement about the rules of football"
Mere Christianity (http://www.selfknowledge.org...)

Also, I'd like to point out something before I finish. My opponent has wasted his second round so that I would be the only one with the burden of proof. However, if my arguments fail then do we accept subjective morality by default? Nope, we simply assume nothing, so my opponent, also, fails. This does not help me, but I don't like it when my opponents are lazy :p
Debate Round No. 2
socialpinko

Con

I'm not lazy I merely wanted to see what the arguments were in favor of objective morals. Since my opponent never provided any, this debate has been a waste.
vardas0antras

Pro

This debate does have value! It shows what not to do, for example, never set up a in a way that makes you forfeit the second round. Also, it influences us for example, you will be more careful, I'll be less enthusiastic and the readers will appreciate good debates more. Finally, this debate has value because I presented an argument... Wait, what?

You said "my opponent never provided any" but I did provide an argument in a form of a quote "so I'll present my argument in the form of a quote." This is from the second round. What was the argument? Well, read the quote:

"Quarreling means trying to show that the other man is in the wrong. And there would be no sense in trying to do that unless you and he had some sort of agreement as to what Right and Wrong are; just as there would be no sense in saying that a footballer had committed a foul unless there was some agreement about the rules of football"
Mere Christianity

Also, if you simply wanted to hear arguments and not debate them then you should have created a read and not a debate, just saying.

Vote Pro for my opponent did not refute my argument
Debate Round No. 3
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by innomen 6 years ago
innomen
goofball debate
Posted by innomen 6 years ago
innomen
goofball debate
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
But you have both the will and the desire to continue being mad at me because you lost against me. Okay.
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
>.> I don't have the will nor desire to bother with these type of comments, to be honest.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
Get out of the past. Just because you lost like 4 debates to me, doesn't mean you should be mad at me all the time.
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
"@Vardas: You just can't get over me, can you?"
I'm confused, what are you trying to say?
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
@SocialPinko:http://www.urbandictionary.com...

@Vardas: You just can't get over me, can you?
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
" You are the one who wasted the first round."
According to you, the first round was for definitions ONLY.
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
"what's facepalm?" An act which expresses (usually fake) intellectual superiority
Posted by socialpinko 6 years ago
socialpinko
what's facepalm?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
socialpinkovardas0antrasTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made no arguments, forfeited, and admits to trolling.