The Instigator
WilliamsP
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

Humanity is a pathetic species. We must reform our society.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 5 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/22/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,888 times Debate No: 46511
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (5)

 

WilliamsP

Pro

The first round is only for accepting the debate and stating your opinion. My opinion is the following;

"Humanity is a pathetic species. If aliens saw us, they would likely laugh at us, stare at us, or shed a tear due to the failures of the human race. We must reform our society and we must change our ways."
Debate Round No. 1
WilliamsP

Pro

Global Warming

I find it quite appalling how many politicians refuse to recognize the reality of global warming. In fact, global warming is caused by humans. Surely, there will be a few natural factors, but global warming is, for the most part, a human creation. We allow the construction of nuclear power plants to occur and we pollute our atmosphere by using gas-powered cars, If Humanity had been just a little more creative, all humans would be driving electric cars by now. Possibly even, we could be utilizing teleporters.

Treatment of fellow humans

I am appalled by humanity's treatment of its own members. Not only are we sexist - women earn less than men for the exact same job and exact same work hours - and racist - the unfair treatment of President Obama just because of his race - but we are also committing crimes and not doing enough to ensure these crimes do not happen again. We are not enacting the logical and morally correct gun control and we are not enacting the proper legislation that will ensure prosperity and justice for all.

Treatment of animals

Humans are animals, I know. But just for debating purposes, I will use this terminology. However, this is a debate for another time.

We are not treating our neighbors with the proper respect. I am not opposed to vegetarianism, but I believe there can be an excess of meat. Also, the meat we eat comes from animals that have been chemically treated and abused. When I eat a steak, I look down at my plate and pay my respects to the pig that had to die. Then I eat it, savoring the taste and quality of the meat.
Also, we do not treat our animals fairly by cutting down rain forests. The Amazon Rain Forest is smaller by a considerable amount and dozens of species become extinct DAILY!

I will make additional points in the following rounds.
Mikal

Con

I am going to start this the same way I normally do. Let us review the resolution at hand ,and what my adversary must do to win.

Resolution - Humanity is a pathetic species. We must reform our society.

I want to focus on the first part of this because it is a dual resolution. If I can disprove the first part of this, that humanity is a pathetic species, negating the second part will not be needed. The resolution is stating that we must reform because we are pathetic, so if I can show we are not pathetic I have won this debate.

My adversary has the BOP and must meet both ends of the resolution. He must show that we are pathetic and that we must reform our ways. Again all I must do is provide reasonable doubt and show reasons why we are not pathetic and this debate goes in my favor.

The key word I want to focus on is pathetic. The context of the word and how it is displayed in the resolution is as follows.

Pathetic - pitifully inferior or inadequate[1]

Now I am going to jump into some contentions




Pathetic in comparison to who?

When we are looking at the fact that we are pathetic, the next thing we must ask is how and why? It is saying we are inferior but there is no way this can be the case. There is nothing we could be inferior too. Humans are at the top of almost every food chain in every environment [2]. By food chain in this regard I am referring to predator capabilities. If you look at studies we as humans actually rank in the middle but this is because of the amount of killing that is done and other things that factor into it. I am referring to our ability to kill and what we can kill. This is primarily due to our intelligence and brain.





"The most distinguishing feature of Homo sapiens is the ability to think intelligently, which developed in accordance with its impressive nervous system. While almost all animals have brains, the human brain is unique in several respects. Compared to that of other species, the human brain is extremely large relative to body mass, and it consumes roughly 25 percent of the glucose metabolized by the body and 15 percent of the oxygen (Clark et al., 1999). All things considered, the human brain is one of the most complex biological systems ever to have evolved on Earth[3]."

Evolution compared to other species.

Compared to other species we have evolved to a different level. Since our common ancestors or possible ancestor Sahelanthropus tchadensis roamed the earth around 7 million years ago, our level of speciation has far outweighed that of other species. We are the only species that can reflect and think on our actions, and the only one on earth to advance to a level that far surpassed other species.








We have worked our way up over the years. All the way back to learning what fire was, up unto modern science where we could go into outer space. We have the capability to wipe a country off the face of the earth with modern technology. So saying we are pathetic is a drastic illusion my adversary has conceived. There is no species on earth that can even compare to us, so when he says we are pathetic there is really nothing to compare us too. We are not pathetic, we are at the top of the world.

Survival of the fittest.

Darwins law is a great way for us to see how we got here. Essentially this is a principle saying that species adapt and change by natural selection with the best suited mutations becoming dominant[4]. This goes off my other argument but when compared to other species we are extremely dominant. We control almost all the known earth, with no other species posing a threat to us. The only threat we have is ourselves and even then we are still at the top of world. No species has even came close to adapting to the level we have achieved.

Aliens

Any argument or statement my adversary brings up about this is irrelevant. He mentioned this in his opening round but this is so off topic ,because there is nothing empirical to show they exist. Therefore we can no compare our self to something that has no observable proprieties.


Conclusion

We are definitely not pathetic. I have shown how and why we are not inferior as a species.




[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
[2] http://www.miseagrant.umich.edu...
[3] http://fubini.swarthmore.edu...
[4] http://www.phrases.org.uk...
Debate Round No. 2
WilliamsP

Pro

I will not deny the points you have made. There is nothing I disagree with so far. However, you cannot deny the things I have mentioned in the second round.
We may not be pathetic to anything on Earth. I acknowledge our superiority over all other Earthly species. However, as I have expressed in a previous debate, http://www.debate.org..., the possibility of other intelligent life existing somewhere in the Universe is so high, that is it reasonable to assume there is in fact life beyond Earth. Now, just for debating purposes, let's pretend there is evidence proving there is other intelligent life. If this were the case and this was a turning point in the entire debate, would you acknowledge our inferiority to alien species? Given this new situation, do you think aliens would be appalled by the things I have mentioned in round 2?
Mikal

Con

This has just got awkward. I will note that the point my adversary raised are somewhat true. I could dispute the fact global warming is man made with facts, I could also bring up that animals don't have rights. Even the treatment of humans boils down to morality. If you take into consideration nihilism for the fact that morality could be relative or subjective, then we are just abiding by the laws of nature. None of those points mean we are pathetic.

Aliens

My adversary has asked me to concede the fact that aliens exist. I will not do this even for the purpose of this debate and I will explain why. Aliens are not observable. Meaning if I were to conceded this, pro could assign any trait to them he wished to meet his BOP. He could say they could time travel, go into different galaxies, and speak 1 thousand different languages. That would classify them as superior in many ways. The issue is that he could just pick traits that he wanted. To compare humanity to something, it has to be something that is observable so the traits are in fact naturalistic. All information regarding intelligent life on other planets is merely speculation and guess work. We cannot compare ourselves to this and I will not concede the fact they exist. Nothing has shown this to be true

Conclusion

Humans are not a pathetic species. As my adversary notes

"I acknowledge our superiority over all other species. "

Debate Round No. 3
WilliamsP

Pro

I acknowledge my lack of evidence. I know that I will lose the debate. I proclaim my opponent the victor and I cease all arguments.

Congratulations, Mikal. I must admit, you are the better debater. It is the burden of proof that always makes we lose debate. Whenever we have discovered proof of alien life, I will debate this topic again. Unfortunately, it won't be with you.
Mikal

Con

I accept my adversaries gracious concession. Let's move this debate along
Debate Round No. 4
WilliamsP

Pro

I have not proven the "humanity is a pathetic species." However, I have made valid arguments for "we must reform our society." What is your opinion of the matter?
Mikal

Con

To uphold the resolution you must first show that P1 is true. This is a progressive syllogism

[P1] Humanity is a pathetic species
[P2] Therefore we must reform society

If P1 is shown to be false, then P2 is negated with it.
You conceded that I negated P1 so P2 falls apart with it.

I would like to thank my adversary for proposing this debate and putting up a fight. He has offered a gracious concession and bowed out. This was eloquent and refreshing.

Thank you for the debate.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
WilliamsPMikalTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: concession
Vote Placed by jamccartney 3 years ago
jamccartney
WilliamsPMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro is indeed correct. However, both Pro and Con are tied in most because they were both very great at this debate. Con used more sources, however, which gives him the points for that.
Vote Placed by Seeginomikata 3 years ago
Seeginomikata
WilliamsPMikalTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con points were based mostly on semantics, but nonetheless were strong and right on-topic. Pro forfeit and good con sources give con points in conduct and source.
Vote Placed by Defro 3 years ago
Defro
WilliamsPMikalTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession
Vote Placed by GodChoosesLife 3 years ago
GodChoosesLife
WilliamsPMikalTied
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:15 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.