Humans are Vile beings.
Debate Rounds (3)
I am supposed to argue that "Humans are not Vile Beings". It's crystal clear that Pro is making Faulty Generalization and Wishful Thinking Fallacies.
Vileness is just one of our qualifies, it doesn't necessarily need to define us.
Let me throw some light on it.
There are people fighting in the name of religion because they have committed themselves to a particular dogma. Similarly there are also people who follow the path of Non-Violence and Compassion, thanks to their religion.
So you see, the coin is even with two sides and Pro is seeing only one side, I request him to see the bigger picture.
Anyways, when you have a group trying to get people to change their religious beliefs with force, they are labeled as terrorists or an extremist group. In other words, people see them as evil.
And as for the people who used nonviolence and compassion, they most likely wanted to lash out but had the willpower not to do so. Thus, their and our human nature is evil for even wanting to act violently.
I have got another reason to support my argument as to how humans are vile beings. If we look at the government and its politicians, it is easy to say that the whole system is corrupt. Corruption is a form of evil. Pocketing money from taxes, abusing authority, and accepting bribes is all proof of corruption.
Evil is just a possibility of human nature just like kindness. What if an evil person starts acting kind? would you change the debate topic to "Humans are Kind Beings"?
Corruption is a big issue. Its impossible to change the world, all we can do is to change ourselves. We don't need to Panic but simply focus on doing good things.
Humans are as susceptible to being Vile, as they are to being Kind. So imposing vileness alone is pretty inaccurate.
Resolution negated, Vote Con!
jeffrey1667 forfeited this round.
Ash_RationalTheist forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 8 months ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro starts the debate arguing that humans are vile beings and giving several examples to back this claim up. Con starts by pointing out two fallacies which Pro committed, and which Pro never counter-rebutted. Con also argued that humans aren't always vile and can be good too, and thus Pro is failing to see the big picture. Pro then responds by arguing that humans are evil by nature and that just because they have the willpower to stop doesn't mean that they aren't evil. Con counters this again by referring to the fact that humans aren't *always* vile and can be good at times too. Pro then forfeits the final round, leaving Con's counters to stand unchallenged. Due to Pro failing to uphold the BOP and leaving Con unchallenged in the end, Con wins the debate.
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.