The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

Does love make more people sad than it makes people happy?

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/16/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,130 times Debate No: 54802
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (18)
Votes (1)




This debate will be about what love does to our society.
This includes all side-effects from love to third parties.

First round will be for acceptance.

The reason I'm holding this debate is because I'm currently quite disappointed with my own love life, so I might be too sceptical at times. Forgive me if I lose control in this debate and start saying stupid things.
Debate Round No. 1


Love would, according to me, bring more sadness in the world than happiness.

These days a lot of marriages seem to fail, and the percentage of divorces rises every year. I doubt I even have to source this to prove it.

There are 2 sides to love: either it works perfectly and nothing goes wrong (staying together OR having a happy breakup) and then there's the side that brings sadness.

In most cases, when someone falls in love, it won't turn into something. However, people still expect something and end up being disappointed. I will now make a short summary of in what cases love does not work out.

1) A person never finds the courage to start talking to his/her love
2) A person falls in love with someone unavailable (already dating/in love)
3) A person starts dating someone but gets hurt (in any way)
4) A person doesn't fall in love, but is still jealous that his/her friends do find love in life.

I have already named the 2 possible cases in which people would be happily in love already.

Isn't it fairly obvious that the cases I mentioned as a whole, occur a lot more often than the 2 cases in which people would actually be happy?


So looking over the resolution, we must review what we are debating

The resolution is essentially this

Resolution - On balance love makes people more happy than sad.

Reviewing the BOP - My adversary has the BOP in this because he is claiming that love makes more people sad than happy

So when we are discussing what the resolution is, this is a weighed debate. The essence of this debate is about what love tends to make people happy or sad, and then adding a scale to it.

This is not a debate about whether loving someone or the concept of "true love", makes people more sad or more happy but whether what love actually is makes people more happy than sad.

C1) Defining love

Love itself is not what some people might think it is. This is not a true love type of discussion, but love as in loving someone deep down inside you. Meaning you would do things for them, or go out or your way to help them, or just generally and deeply care for them. People/things you can love

(a) Your significant other
(b) Family
(c) Friends
(d) Pets
(e) hobbies

There are so many different types of love and without love being defined to a specific type, we are left discussing love as a whole.

Meaning that you can love your wife/girlfriend in a way where you love and want to be with her sexually, love your family in a way where you just deeply care for them, and love hobbies in a way where you enjoy participating in them. I even have dogs that I deeply love and care for. All of these bring me great job and happiness.

C2) Love is subjective

What you love and whom you love is entirely subjective depending on the person. So having a deep passion for something or someone generally outweigh any sadness that comes from it.

Take these 3 examples

(1) You love football. Your favorite team loses and you are sad about it but you are right back the next week cheering for them. While there was a brief moment of sadness, and there will continue to be brief moments of sadness the happiness you gain from watching something you enjoy and loving watching it far outweighs and sadness that comes from it.

(2) When you love your wife and girlfriend you may get into fights. They could even cheat on you and it could bring about brief moments of pain and hurt. A lot of people tend to forgive fights and possibly even cheating because they care about the person so much. A good many people actually manage to work out relationships like this or even remain friends with the person. Even if a relationship ends in a bad way, the people can still love and care for each other.

Often relationships bring forth a butterfly feeling that lasts for months on end. This essentially means once you start a relationship the new idea of it and the concept it of it produces butterflies in your stomach and makes chemicals in your body go crazy[1]. This is what people consider love but it is not actually all that love is. That feeling goes away after a time, and is replaced with a deeper care and concern. You may argue with your wife or girlfriend but even if you fight you will try to make things work and work things out. That butterfly feeling is replaced with genuine caring and concern

Some studies even show that being in love promotes a type of aura of happiness around you[2]. This same aura of happiness in turn effects others and makes them happy. Did you know if you smile at someone it can help there day[2][3]?

So one single act of being in love can have a domino effect, and in turn make people happy that you do not even know.

C3) Happiness and pets

Pets are shown to make most of their owners happy. You can love them as well, just like you would love a child. Some people often use pets as a substitute for children. They promote longevity, health, and emotional stability [4]

C4) Sex and love

Passionate love making is a great benefit of love. Sex by itself is good and all, but it is nothing like having sex when you deeply and genuinely care about the person. Having passionate sex that is often fueled by love increases satisfaction among couples, relives stress, and brings happiness to the relationship. This is a higher level of sex than just having sex for recreation.

Some studies shown that being in love and sexually active with the person you love brings more happiness to the person than making a great deal of money [5]


Love in all aspects of life brings a great deal of joy and happiness. My adversary must show that there is some way that the amount of sadness it brings out weights the happiness. This is a comparative debate and he has failed to uphold his BOP. IT is on him just not to show that love can bring sadness, but show that the sadness outweighs that of the happiness. I have show that love can have a domino effect on people, thus providing a great deal of happiness to those whom are not even in love. I have also shown that love is subjective and that you can love anything from sports to friends. The love that you invest into hobbies and families often brings a great deal of joy and satisfactions, which far outweighs the brief moments of sadness that accompany it.

Debate Round No. 2


I think my opponent has misunderstood what this debate is about, I'll clarify which love I hoped we could discuss.

C1) Defining love

The love I hoped to discuss was strong attraction to someone you want to be a couple with. Family, friends and pets do not come into discussion as you cannot date them. I hoped to have a discussion solely about what you call "your significant other".

C2) Love is subjective

I'll only talk about your second contention here.
In your example you only talk about the "brief moments of pain" whilst most people tend to regret all the times they had once they break up. I know many examples of adults like this.
You talk about couples breaking up and staying friends, but clearly that's not what the majority of breakups look like, right?

Also, should there be children, what will it be like for them? 90% of unmarried couples with babies will break up. Can this be good for the child?

My opponent talks about both the initial butterfly feeling, and then the feeling of caring and concern.
I have no doubt this is exactly what loving someone looks like, but the question is, how often does it work out? How often does it turn into something flawless? I would like my opponent to adress the percentage of persons that actually find such happiness in life.

And, obviously, the fact that a smile makes your day will not weight out the fact that when you get rejected it could stay with you your whole life.

C3) Happiness and pets

Is not about what I wanted to discuss.

C4) Sex and love

I will show you a few things about sex now, as sex probably comes with more frustration and jealousy than anything else. This source:
will show you that 10% of women never reach an orgasm in their life. Alot of other women will have other problems with getting a climax.

Imagine the frustration that comes with it. An average man will not make his woman climax during intercourse. In fact, only 1/3 times a girl will climax during intercourse. Men tend to be dissapointed, so girls lie about having climaxed.

Sex has also become something that takes actual effort. It is no longer lovemaking, it is about achieving something. For young boys, it is to achieve sex. The age of consent is getting younger and younger, and that can't be good. Most girls I know have lost their virginity by the age of 16. For adults, love has become something you expect to be good. Most people are very dissapointed when their lover turns out not to be good in bed, which puts pressure on the relationship.

I also don't have to tell you how bad 18+ people feel if they have never had sex in their life.


I will now show how the sadness outweights the happiness.

1) love makes us feel vulnerable

2) love is unequally distributed

3) when you really love someone, it will stimulate fear to lose him/her.

4) Many of us struggle with underlying feelings of being unlovable. We have trouble feeling our own value and believing anyone could really care for us. These feelings hurt us.

for these points, this was my source:

Other than this, my old arguments still stand: most "loves" do break up, and most breakups are not the "happy" ones my opponent mentions.

Although there are indeed great satisfactions for those who do find love, a lot of people never marry (estimated 45% and still growing) and some never even find true love. The percentage of people that actually gets to enjoy the points you mentioned, that being a flawless relationship with either staying together or a happy breakup, with good sex etc, is very small. My earlier mentioned source has shown that love is distributed unequally, so almost all couples will not have mutual feelings towards one another.

My conclusion would be that the bad things do outweight the good here, in percentage. The points my opponent sums up could not possibly occur more than the points I summed up.

I would like to ask the reader this fairly simple question: of all the time you have been in love, how much of that time were you actually happy? How much of that time do you not regret after a breakup? Of all the times you were in love, how often did it make you feel good about yourself? How often were you dissapointed because you felt "not good enough"?

My opponent can have the "source" points as he clearly took his time to look things up. I deserve no such points as I don't do it as good as he does; I am generally not a fan of "internet proof" which is why I tend not to source myself.


First I would like to point out that my adversary did not define love in his opening round. He would have to have stated that he wanted to debate only love in regards to people and not ideas, concepts, animals, or hobbies. He just simply stated that love brings more sadness that happiness

By the definition of love we can define it.

(a) a feeling of warm personal attachment or deep affection, as for a parent, child, or friend. [1]
(b) to have a strong liking for; take great pleasure in: to love music. [1]

So we can clearly see that love is not just directly in regards to people, but that you can love a good many different things.

C1) Points dropped and conceded

(1) He dropped love for hobbies
(2) He dropped love for pets
(3) He concedes that you can love a majority of things, that have a positive effect on people such as sports and games.
(4) He dropped love for friends

C2) Brief moment of pain/ Subjective love

He states that people break up and hate each other or often regret it with an ongoing sadness that outweighs any happiness at all.

(a) This is not sourced and is a personal opinion We can dismiss this and due to him having the BOP a non sourced claim like this can be dismissed.

In fact most people that break up often do move on. Again love is subjective. This does not have to be true love in these sense of a relationship but can be a deep emotional passion for a new person they could find after the break up. They could even find love in a sex buddy or in some regards. People that break up often do move on and find new happiness that outweighs any sadness from a past relationship. In fact more than 40 percent of marriages are remarriages [2]

This shows that people that are no happy are often seeking new types of happiness no matter how they may find it. The big question is does sadness in relationships/love outweigh the happiness. I do not have to prove either, but must simply show that people can be just as happy because of love as they are sad. My adversary must go the extra mile and show love promotes more sadness than happiness due to his BOP. We can see from the chart above that people want to be happy and seek it out. They are always looking for love and compassion even if it requires divorce in some cases

When people get that initial "butterfly feeling" or develop love from an individual they often develop feel higher levels of dopamine which increase happiness in themselves and even people around them [3]. Studies even show that a hug can ward off depression for some people, and that the feeling love brings is often a counter balance to sadness in itself [3]. While it is shown that a bad relationship can weaken stress people that tend to leave that relationship and seek out a new and healthy relationship often have lower stress levels, more energy, and even all around show signs of more complete happiness [3].

Dopamine itself is a love chemical that releases in the brain and often promotes longevity in relationship. In a way it is what also makes people horny. People that are "in love", often show higher signs of dopamine which can contribute to the butterfly feeling. This feeling will end but the feeling of love can often remain and in turn promote a great deal of happiness [4]

C3) Pets

Dropped see C1 for other dropped points

C4) Sex and love

My adversary sites a study saying 10 pecent of women never climax during sex. I could dispute this source but I am going to take it into consideration just becuase this was such a poor point.

So let's assume 10 percent of women that are in love have sex and do no reach an orgasm.

(a) This does not account for the mans happiness
(b) This does not account for the fact they did not enjoy sex. The woman could still work with the man and enjoy getting him off, or work with him to teach him what she likes so that she is able to finish
(c) There is 90 other percent of people (not men included) which would make this number more around 95 percent of people that are in love that will reach orgasms. The minuscule number presented by my adversary is irrelveant if 95 percent of others are enjoying sex and happiness from love. This is a weighed debate and logically 95 > 5 percent, so his own source weights in my favor.

My adversary brings up the fact that most people are dissatisfied with their sex life, and I would disagree. No one will be perfect the first time but that is the point of a relationship( and love ) in this case. Try try and try again. The first few times will always suck, but after talking with your partner and finding out what they want sex is often ore enjoyable and you can please your partner because you are aware of what they want. People are always finding ways to spice up sex to make it energetic and exciting like oral and or role playing with their partner to keep the happiness in sex after being together for countless years. Sex is always a great way to relieve stress and bring happiness to a relationship

Different girls like different positions and different styles of sex

So experimenting with different styles or just trying alot of different positions can often help her receive a climax. Most of this is open knowledge and a great majority of couples are often seeking how to improve their sexual experience. So saying a small minority of people do not enjoy sex, is not in favor of my adversary. In fact this point is entirely in my favor since by acknowledging that only a minority does not enjoy it, he is admitting that the majority does enjoy it and gains happiness from it.


My adversary drops around 3-5 of my points about loving hobbies, pets, and entertainment because he chooses not to defend this. He did not specify that he only wanted to debate love in relationships, but did state that he wanted to debate love as a whole. I abide by the fact you can love an idea, person, concept, or thing just as much as a partner so all these points remain uncontested and dropped

His point about Sex weighs in my favor and I properly refuted his response to C2

In the end the resolution is not upheld and he did not fulfill his BOP in the slightest.


Debate Round No. 3


I did not define love, but I did point out it was about love towards another person (significant other). That should have been made clear by my personal example.

As for defining love I do agree it is much more than just that for the significant other. However, that is NOT what this debate is about.

For the rest of the debate, I find it quite useless.
I don't care if my opponent gets all the points, but using "he did not source it" as a counterargument is quite ridiculous. It is obvious that most relationships end by breaking up. the percentage of people that only have one significant other throughout their life MUST be close to 1%. To deny such a thing because I did not source it, is ridiculous. My opponent can't seriously by stating that most relationships end happy?

The fact that people do move on has nothing to do with it. The sadness occurs much more than the happiness. My main argument for this is what I have already said: Love is unequal. One side will always love the other side more. My opponents argument was that 40% of the marriages are remarriages, while he does not point out that even these marriages tend to fail.

The percentage of people that actually move on is indeed large. But do they have another choice? I might not be able to source this, but it is commonly known that Freud's theory involves love for the mother. People will always keep on looking to equal that love for their mother with another person, but cannot possibly succeed. Therefore people will move on, but will always meet dissapointment to a certain degree.
I have no doubt that receiving and showing affection makes a person happy, but in the end, love is 1) unequal, and 2) incomplete. Both of these things always result in relationships having problems. Ideal couples are incredibly rare.

About sex, my opponent makes fun of me and is probably enthousiastic about sex himself. However, sex is indeed something that comes with frustration rather than happiness.
But I'll be mean now and play his game: none of his arguments count as he has not sourced.

Furthermore, he ignored ALL my arguments :
1) love makes us feel vulnerable

2) love is unequally distributed

3) when you really love someone, it will stimulate fear to lose him/her.

4) Many of us struggle with underlying feelings of being unlovable. We have trouble feeling our own value and believing anyone could really care for us. These feelings hurt us.

Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know what to say anymore. My opinion was the most controversial so I should have made the points here, not my opponent. I am the defending side. My opponent ignored all my defensive arguments.
Not only does he use pictures and a different and hard-to-watch typing style, he also relies mainly on sources which are easy to find. A simple google could offer you 10000 reasons why love would be good. My opponent's debating style is solely based on those sources and refutes logic by saying it is not sourced.

This is a different debate, but the attitude of "I sourced, I win" is incredibly childish as the internet is full of lies. Should my opponent have sourced an actual scientific book, then I would agree. This is not a battle of who looks up the most info, though. It is about who shoves forward the best argumentation in a clear and well-structured way.

I'm greatly dissapointed in my opponent who pretends he's won even before I can present counterarguments. I will not get even more mad about it, I will simply forfeit the next rounds as I honestly do not want to waste more time having another debate based on unreliable internet sources, with an opponent who ignores my argumentation and then says he has won.



Reviewing the debate thus far

C1 ) Points dropped and conceded

(1) He dropped love for hobbies
(2) He dropped love for pets
(3) He concedes that you can love a majority of things, that have a positive effect on people such as sports and games.
(4) He dropped love for friends

This holds true. He refuses to acknowledge or debate any of these points. He says he intended the debate to hold only to the definition of a love life with a person, but states that we are debating whether or not "love" brings more happiness than sadness. I have shown the definition of love and how it can be directed at things other than people which was not state nor defined in R1. Therefore we can conclude that the basic definition of love applies to this debate and all of these points remain uncontested.

C2) Subjective love

My adversary drops this point. I have shown that people will always seek out love over happiness even if they are unhappy, and that how the feeling of love raises levels of dopamine which can even promote longevity. I have even show how being in love can promote a positive feeling or smile, which in turn makes third parties around you happy.

Note : All of my adversaries arguments are just assertions and not facts. None of his statements are sourced or verified. He just says (x) = (y) because it believes it to be true. I have shown studies how people will never give up on love and will find it in all types of situations. This can include people, objects, hobbies, and even pets. Being in love with someone, even if it is a hobby often promotes mental health and will effect the people around you positively. See my R3

C3) Pets


C4) Sex and Love


The argument argument along with point I presented was dropped entirely. I have shown that people often enjoy sex and will do everything in their power to enjoy it to the fullest. My adversary even states that only a small margin of people do not enjoy sex, which adds credibility to point about the majority enjoying it and like it.

This contention weights in my favor.

Brief Rebuttal

In addition to this, I dropped none of his points that he claimed I dropped. They were all tied into my C2 argument which is weight the fact that love brings more happiness. These minor points are irrelevant if people experience them and then seek out love in other forms or people, because these feeling of sadness will diminish and will be replaced with happiness when the person finds a new avenue of interest.


This is a clear win for myself. My adversary has dropped almost all of my arguments, provides no sourced evidence for anything he is saying, and refused to argue that love can be applied to things besides relationships.

He has by no means upheld his BOP
Debate Round No. 4


My opponent chose to be a jerk by "reviewing the debate". Saying he has refuted my argumentation when in fact he has not.

It is easy to say you won and lay claim. I'm going to close this debate before voting period if that is possible, as a mean guy like you deserves no "victory" when in fact he only lied about refuting my arguments.

I have already sourced, by the way. Sourced argumentation that you have ignored.

Your style of debating revolves solely around yourself as you clearly go against logic itself by using "sources".

My opponent can have the "win for himself" as he did show the good sides of love, yet shoves forward NO argumentation that in percentage, most people will end up happy when in love. I however, have clearly shown that most couples do break up and most marriages fail.

I don't honestly care about this debate anymore as your style of debating involves more of saying that you won than actual argumentation. You keep on repeating about animals etc. When CLEARLY that is not part of this debate.

You ruined this experience for me and have wasted my time. This could have been an interesting debate based on logic rather than on poor sources from the internet. My adversary fails to see that my claim is so controversial that there is nothing to be found on the internet proving it, and yet he states that I should source to be believed.

This makes my opponent a good debater, a lawyer that could absolve a serial killer from any kind of punishment, but it does not make his arguments any better or falsify my claim.

Goodbye, con. Don't ever challenge me in a debate again.


Well this is the end. Let's review this one final time

My adversary has the BOP and must show that love makes people more sad than happy

(1) He has not shown this at all other than speculations without fact
(2) He has shown that love can make people sad, but has failed to show that sadness outweighs the happiness
(3) He has dropped and conceded all of my points about loving a hobby, pet, friends, and family and refuses to respond to them

I have

(1) Shown that people always will seek out happiness in love and even in sex
(2) That love can have a domino effect and even effect people near/around you
(3) That being in love promotes longevity, mental healthy, and gives you a general sense of happiness.
(4) I have shown that people can love extracurricular activities such as football or even love a pet and it promotes mental health and happiness.


I would like to thank my adversary for this debate, but would like to remind the voting audience why he lost

He has not upheld his BOP, and has not provided anything other than speculation that sadness outweighs happiness in regards to love. A entirety of his arguments were not sourced and just based off his personal assumptions

For him to have won he must not just have shown that love can cause sadness but that sadness has to outweigh the happiness from love

He has failed to do this, thus not fulfilling his BOP

Debate Round No. 5
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by revic 2 years ago
As we have already agreed upon, we were debating apartly. He named all the good things about love, I named all the bad things. We cannot prove quantities. That is why this debate was a bad choice in the first place, unless you'd go without sourcing and accept reasoning. My reasoning was not accepted by my opponent, so at that moment this debate was decided. I SHOULD have set out rules, yes. I didn't, and my opponent took the opportunity instead.

Con's style: I am not on this site to debate presenting your case to a judge with an I-know-things-better mentality. I'm on this site for fun in the first place. Fun involves speaking to your opponent, and not to the imaginary "judge". Speaking involves being rational and not humiliating your opponent.
In court, I would love to see him. Even have him as my own lawyer. But in my free time, I wouldn't want him to get that serious. I consider this more of a game for amateur debators rather than a place to ruin someone's day by completely humiliating him.

Although I do know this is DEBATE.ORG and that things are supposed to get heated and parties are supposed to be mean, I mostly enjoy those debates where both parties seek the truth together. would be much more enjoyable and suitable, as we must all be humble and admit we are no experts and aren't the psychologists/historians/politicians to actually debate these topics. Some, apperently, like to pretend they are. A childish thing considering they use internet as their sources and have not read a single book on the topic.
Posted by bladerunner060 2 years ago
Pro, your attempts to fault Con fall flat. You had the BoP here--it's YOUR job to prove your case. If you can't because of evidence issues like the ones you note, *then the resolution fails*.

That you complain that Con's style is more suited to a courtroom is an almost backhanded compliment. This is a debate site. You had a resolution, and were expected to defend it. OF COURSE he was going to go against your resolution, and OF COURSE he was going to poke holes in whatever you present wherever he can. That's his job as your opponent!
Posted by revic 2 years ago
But, if you were to come up with a model that contradicts say... Freud's theory, and your model does hold up in every presented case, I would believe you. You would have used reason to come to a solution, and what you said is no less worthy of being true than what the famous psychoanalist said.

Apperently on this site, that is not done: you all seem to lay more belief in something sourced from the internet and nullify all rebuttals unless the opponent countersources. That method is ridiculous as apperently a human with good arguments can't even present his own ideas anymore in this world.

I have also looked up my opponents records. Apperently he's a very handsome, muscled debator who won EVERY SINGLE ONE OF HIS DEBATES except ONE. a total of a 170 wins, i thought. Is it his method that makes him seem like an imminent victor? His ways of "reviewing" the debates stating that he has already won? His method would be loved in court cases, while I rather hope for a friendly tone to find truth together instead of lawyers hating one another.

Posted by revic 2 years ago
As I have shown, we cannot do a quantity research of the amounts of happiness and love since every experience is fairly unique. I have simply shown that the memory afterwards could erase the happiness from before.
Con has done a great job describing the benefits of love, but he hasn't done that either: he has simply made a sum of things that are good about love rather than showing how much they occur. Naming good sex for one, is something that cannot be proven. I can't source the book I've read, as that apperently wouldn't count, but that book is scientifical research that proves female orgasms would never occur during sex, unless they are stimulated by something that turns them alot, almost a fetish. This means, that on the average, a woman will enjoy sex but will sometimes lie to her husband about having an orgasm. I made my dad ask all his friends, none of which have ever made their girlfriends orgasm. This is where honesty will be facing the lies you can find on the internet, as Mikal has used them: he states that sex would still be good although the pleasure is clearly divided unequally.

But that is not the point here. You know just as well as I do that most marriages fail. That is commonly known. Finding statistics for such things is hard, though. Most couples will not be honest when filling out polls. So you can't simply look up the amount of females who'd have an orgasm during intercourse. Or the amount of people who are happy about their sex life.
But like you said, I would still need evidence to prove this - no matter how logic it may seem. As I said earlier, I prefer a philosophical way which uses reason to come to a solution. Thinking is the key, IMO, to find a model that holds up until a case is presented that contradicts it. I hoped to have such a debate, like I always set up as rules for my earlier debates, rather than one where I would need internet sources to be credible.

Posted by DylanLang 2 years ago
Wow, looking over my comment makes me look like a fairy tale princess, what was i smoking?
Posted by bladerunner060 2 years ago
To clarify: I have no idea what that means TO YOU--as in, how you're using it. I know what actual logical claims are...they appeal to a logical argument (which doesn't negate evidence, but uses it as a premise of a logical argument).
Posted by bladerunner060 2 years ago

When you say that your claims are "logical" I have no idea what that means. You're clearly appealing to what you say is generally true--but it COULD be not true. We could live in a world where most marriages don't fail. That we don't is a matter of evidence, not of "logic".

Still, the point is (as Con has patiently tried to show) that you were arguing that there was more of the quantity of "sadness" than the quantity of "happiness".

Every single marriage could fail, consistently, and that would not necessarily mean that "love make[s] more people sad than it makes people happy". You'd have to argue that X years of happiness prior to failure is more than washed out by the sadness of divorce.

And that is, of course, if we allow your reframing of the debate. Con made a good case for using the general concept of love, since you didn't instigate this with a narrow definition of romantic/partnered love.
Posted by Mikal 2 years ago
That is the entire point, you are debating this from a personal perspective not from an objective viewpoint on how everything is entirely subjective.
Posted by revic 2 years ago
Mikal, I don't see how happiness comes from it. You are filled with desire yet everyone has experienced the pain of facing that it's not mutual. Moving on and forgetting is only logical, but after pain. That "love", from meeting the person to facing that it's not mutual, only results in sadness and regrets and waste of time, don't you agree? I cannot source such things but this is plain reasoning.
Secondly, you say they can seek love in other places afterwards. That is true, but of all the times you were in love, how many times did it actually turn in to something? One can use every existing person as a living proof that when you fall in love, the odds will be greater that it doesn't turn into something. You immediately assumed a new, happy, succesfull relationship just like you did when talking about remarriages. I guess you could argue that later they MIGHT finally find their ideal love, but on the average, there will be a whole lot of "failed loves" before the good one; if you are so lucky to find the love that is perfect for you in the end.
Posted by Mikal 2 years ago
that's not dropping the point I briefly touched on it

(a) that does not disprove they are sad, it just shows that they will not be with that person. You wold have to show that sadness in that situation equates to a higher degree than happiness
(b) I sourced it showing where most people that fall out of love or love someone they no longer like or can not have always seek love in other places which leads to happiness.

again that is your bop to meet
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.