The Instigator
DebaterOfTheMonth
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Blade-of-Truth
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Do physical punishments create a good person?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
Blade-of-Truth
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/9/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 452 times Debate No: 69703
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

DebaterOfTheMonth

Pro

Physical punishments such as a butt spanking or a beating does create a well mannered child. Personally, I used to get D's and F's constantly in my early life, I was always getting into trouble and causing havoc throughout my early life. My parents would also punish me physically, or as simple as taking away something that I used constantly. This greatly benefited me in so many ways. After two years of this improvement, I started making A's, B's, and C's. I felt like a much better person after this too. I understand that although when it's happening we are consumed in rage, but at the same time we have our regrets about doing them, therefore we fix these problems and become a better person.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

I accept the debate. Please begin.
Debate Round No. 1
DebaterOfTheMonth

Pro

DebaterOfTheMonth forfeited this round.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

My opponent, Pro, has forfeited round 2.

I will now present rebuttals for his opening claims, as well as arguments that negate the resolution at hand.

Rebuttals

"Physical punishments such as a butt spanking or a beating does create a well mannered child."

Pro attempts to justify this claim by using himself as the proof. He is essentially claiming that because he was punished physically, he ended up making better grades two years later. This is a basic cause-and-effect claim from Pro. The problem with this claim is that there is no proof validating the claim itself. I can make the claim that I fly, and say how amazing it was, but without proof my claim is nothing more than a story, there is nothing to show the truth of it. That's the problem with this claim from Pro. Unless he can show proof of this "change" that occurred within his life, there is no valid reason for myself and the audience to view it as anything more than an unproven claim.

This is also the only argument presented by Pro. Hence the reason why I wanted Pro to begin after my acceptance round. As it stands now, Pro's only claim has been shown to be lacking any and all proof, and thus Pro stands defeated.

Arguments

I. What is a good person?

Pro is affirming the position that physical punishments create a good person. But what is a *good* person? Without clarification, building counter-arguments is a difficult task. I believe that what might be *good* for one person, might be *bad* in the perspective of another. What is *good* itself is highly subjective and relative. Thus, Pro has failed to even provide a basic ground upon which we could build a case around. Unless Pro defines what a *good* person is, his position is nothing more than a vague playground for any and all philosophers to play ball in. In short, Pro needs to define *good person*

II. There are many factors at play when creating a good person.

Another problem with Pro's stance in this debate is that he is affirming the position that physical punishments are what creates a good person. This leaves out a vast amount of other potential factors that come into play when creating a good person. I do not believe that physical punishments are the sole cause of a good person. Since Pro has the burden to overcome each challenge I raise, I will leave it to Pro to show how physical punishments are the sole cause. If Pro does not do that, he will fail to uphold the BOP and thus rightfully lose this debate.

In closing,

I've presented a rebuttal for the only claim Pro made and additionally presented two arguments of my own, which Pro must now overcome.

I now return the floor to Pro.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
DebaterOfTheMonth

Pro

DebaterOfTheMonth forfeited this round.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

My opponent, Pro, has forfeited the final round. This is his 2nd forfeited round within this debate.

I have rebutted each point raised by Pro, and presented my own counter-arguments, all of which remain standing unchallenged.

For these reasons, I urge a vote for Con.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
DebaterOfTheMonthBlade-of-TruthTied
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
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
DebaterOfTheMonthBlade-of-TruthTied
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
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
DebaterOfTheMonthBlade-of-TruthTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture