God is a women; Lucifer is a man
Debate Rounds (3)
If all men's identities on earth were combined into one consciousness, we would have Lucifer (Satan).
This is three rounds (10,000 Characters), so just start your arguments on acceptance.
Firstly, I'll provide my argument and outline *why* Pros resolution is easily negated.
C1) Debate Premise.
Firstly, we are to assume that god and "Lucifer" (I.E devil) actually exist. Pro hasn't specified either way whether he is exclusively referring to the two as *real* being or simply methaphorical characters. Round one is for clarifying the debate premise and outlining exactly what the rules are, which Pro has entirely failed to do. As Pro is also the one asserting the resolution (which again, he has not expounded on) the BoP also primarily lies with him; particularly as the resolution is entirely opinion based. For Pro to win he/she will actually have to convincingly prove that god is a woman and that satan is a man, in the respect that god has exclusively female traits and that satan has exclusively male traits--with no in between.
C2) Male and Female Traits.
According to Pros resolution and opening statement, god *only* has female traits and satan *only* has male traits; which basically suggests that (all) females have traits that are viewed as "good" and that (all) males have traits that are viewed as "bad"--with again no real balance or combination of both traits within the two sexes, which is what represents reality.
For Pro to again fulfil his BoP, he will have to show that these two specific kind of traits are fixed exclusively to one gender. Which essentially presents an impossible task.
To summarize it simply, each and every individual us different and therefore can have a variety of traits. Some women can have traits that are considered "good", and some can have traits that are considered "bad". The exact same applies to men. The point is that no gender has a fixed set of traits and that Pro has made a false presumption.
C3) God and Satan.
Additionally, neither god and/or satan are seen as two specific genders that represent the qualities of each sex. Rather they are non-human entities that are not of this world, thus meaning are neither man or woman. It also largely depends on how both are interpreted. Some people view the Abrahamic god to be a wrathful being, while others don't believe that he exists at all and that if he does--that he has a considerable amount of failings. What Pro should take note of is that god is not always seen as "good". As with the devil, while he is generally seen as evil, there are different interpretations within different religions and some people even don't view the devil as exclusively "evil"--the matter of belief or lack-of is also important.
Once again, as man and woman are human beings and therefore all different, it is simply implausible for god and satan to be any of the two genders. The same is said for man and woman being like satan or god; the argument does simply not work.
I don't mean anything religiously. By god i mean good. By devil i mean evil. I use the names as metaphors to their meanings. I define good as empathy towards others, not hurting others, etc. I define evil as having malicious intent towards others and acting on it. Like killing, rape, false imprisonment etc.
Men have always been physically stronger than women, so i think this has shaped them to be capable of more "evil" than women. This is at least one premise to my conclusion that all women are less "evil" than all men.
To begin my rebuttals, I'll remind Pro that he *still* he has the basic BoP to fulfil regarding his resolution--and that the exact debate premise should have been clarified in round one.
Pro attempts to argue that he simply meant that man and woman were representative of the devil and god in the "metaphorical" sense, however he's still yet to show precisely how this is.
In fact, Pros entire case so far is based on assumption and gender stereotype--which as I indicated in round one, does not classify as a substantive argument.
Pro has essentially said that *just* because men are generally viewed of as being physically stronger, that they are more like the devil than women. Which is of course a complete logical fallacy. I'll outline two basis questions:
1.) How is strength an "evil"?
2.) And wouldn't god also be strong?
Clearly put, strength in the technical sense is not an evil--it is seen as something positive and a force for good. And god is a figure that is generally viewed of as being "stronger" than the devil, seeing that he would be the one to create the world and give life in the first place.
To highlight once more; No complete set standard exists for how men and women definitively are. Otherwise all women would be alike, and naturally all men.
There is in fact nothing to say that women are "less" evil than men and again Pro has provided no real argument to support his claims.
2) Yes, i haven't started any argument yet ... i think. I will clarify now in this round ^-^
3) Yes, I was being metaphorical
4) is it a gender stereotype?
5) Men are physically stronger.
1) How many humans have men killed? I would say the killing ratio is all i need in regards to the definition of "evil" in the previous round.
2) I agree; a god/good has strengths.
6) I don't believe in god the way you explain it. Yes, strength is a force for good. Men have evolved to this point, but men have had to do a lot of evil. We are the self sacrificing beings. Men had to save their loved ones. We are inherently prone to violence. Both a blessing and a curse. I am in no way talking down on men or women. I am not saying we haven't changed and learned from our mistakes. I am just saying: If you put every consciousness that is male together ... it will have this "blessing and curse" (metaphorically) which makes men like the devil/evil. Now, women have also evolved to this point. Women nurtured and brought the good out of men. Women took care, guided, and loved. And, of course it's getting different; but if you put every consciousness together that is female ... you will have god compared to the proud Lucifer's.
7) I am not saying all are alike. The context is as stated in number six, so i hope you stick to the idea, i'm curious to know this. Just stick to the definitions in round two.
8) How many people have women killed? How many people have men killed? So on with the other evil listed in round 2? I am not generalizing. Women are also evil...men are also good. I'm just stating that men are more evil as a whole ... present and past; well, especially the past ... vice versa with our beautiful queens.
"Blessing and a curse": Hmm, i just mean that men have evolved front line to evil.
"Beautiful queens": i am distracted by your pictures con =) You make my heart reel with poetry.
Once again, just because men are on a general basis "physically stronger" than women it doesn't necessarily mean that they're more evil--which is essentially what the core of Pros argument is. Pro asserts that men have killed more humans, though this does not prove anything or affirm Pros resolution in any way. One could easily use the argument that women have killed humans, and that men have actually saved a lot of humans; again this doesn't *prove* anything but is the general standard of Pros argument.
Pros sixth point [though about the longest thing he's written] again doesn't do anything to prove the resolution. As highlighted in round one, Pro failed to outline his definitions and clarify the terms of the debate; therefore leaving it open to interpretation. Additionally, all statements made in this point are based on gender stereotype and Pro has not offered any evidence to support his assertions. The argument that women "nurtured and brought the good out of men" completely fails due to it being personal assumption and not objective proof of anything. Some women have nurtured, some women haven't. Some men have nurtured, some men haven't--that is what reality essentially is.
Anyway, I'm flattered by your compliment Pro but you haven't made a clear stance in your argument or responded to my own points in any depth. My spelling and grammar is much superior as well.
So, vote CON.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by TheJuniorVarsityNovice 1 year 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: The resolution is vague, you guys needed to dig into what makes something wrong and what makes something right, thats where the debate should have gone, because you guys didn't, the debate was kinda shallow. Overall though, Emilrose wins because she makes the argument that pro must show that evil always has male characteristics and good always has female characteristics. In the end pro only shows that men are, on balance, more evil than women but by no means are their characteristics completely opposite like darkness and light. Outplayz ignored this argument and in doing so conceeded that it was correct, thus I had no choice but to consider it and this gives con the win. Con, dont say you have better spelling and grammar, that's just kinda rude. Pro, you really need to make sure you understand the definitions of all of your words in the resolution so that the debate is clearer and you guys know what you are talking about. Good job to both.
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.