The Instigator
iBeSteve00
Con (against)
Tied
3 Points
The Contender
Evolution078
Pro (for)
Tied
3 Points

If given the chance, what would(n't) you change about the world and life currently?

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/25/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,815 times Debate No: 13471
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

iBeSteve00

Con

I am a new member of Debate.org, and this shall be my first debate. This debate is based on an "if" question, therefore is mostly opinion (I would think).

Since I am a "first timer" of debate.org, I wish for my opposite to start, and present his/her answer to the topic question.
Evolution078

Pro

You know there were many things that went through my head as I read this question, all of the wars, those that are starving, the extinction of so many species of life. But in the end I realize I wouldn't change a thing about the world because everything that has happened has led us to today. Yes you may argue how much better life would be if that drunk driver didn't kill your best friends 4 month year old child (hypothetical) But in the end everything happens for a reason. I have never been a huge christian but if there is one thing I believe in is that some things I just meant to happen. And also If you were to fix something within the world lets say wars, we would be at a higher risk for overpopulation or starvation. If you want to take it to just saying "I would make life perfect" I would disagree for the simple fact that some of lifes greatest joys comes from working hard to get what you want. Yes I would take a free car win the lottery but it doesn't buy you happiness. If I was rich right now & I had 100+ cars that free car wouldn't mean to much to me at this point. Humans will never be completley happy with their lives & their world no matter how much you change it.
Debate Round No. 1
iBeSteve00

Con

First off, I would like to thank you for excepting my debate. Second, I don't think there's going to be much of a third and fourth round. I'm on the exact same page as you (or some other saying which doesn't actually mean what it says). I didn't want to start with "I wouldn't change a thing", because that makes it seem that I think the world is perfect, and it's not. But, the reason that it's not perfect, is why it's so great.

I had a debate with a friend, and I stated: Even if I could, I wouldn't take away the fact that people are prejudice. Racism is just a form a prejudice, and even though (I'm using black people only as an example) slavery was terrible, it strengthened people and made them join together for what they believed in. As you pointed out, most people would argue that the word we be a much better place with out man slaughter.... I mean war, drunk drivers, and drug dealers.

Take Vincent van Gogh. He had both emotional and self-confidence problems, and in the end, was so troubled he commit suicide. Now, as terrible as that is, he's one of the greatest artist known and it's because he was able to turn is grief and pain into beautiful pieces of art.

There's this poem by Shel Selversteen. The Land of Happy:
Have you ever been to the land of happy?
Where everyone's happy all day.
They laugh and they sing, of the happiest things,
And every thing's all jolly and gay.
No one's ever unhappy in happy,
It's laugh and smiles galore.
I've been to the land of happy,
Man! What a bore!

If someone said they take all the "bad" out of the world, all of the wars, disease, emotional problems, bullying, etc. Id say "Well, might as well take all the creativity too." To me, saying you'd take all the pain and grief out of the world, has the exact same equivalence as saying you'd take all the happiness and joy out of the world. You can know what light is, if you do not know dark. Like kids who say "I wish it was summer all year." No they don't if it was summer all year it'd get boring and always be hot. They like summer because it's a break from their normal school retain and they can do other things (like camp).

Once again, thanks for your input.
Evolution078

Pro

Ladies & Gentlemen I would like to take a slight twist to this debate because my opponent has ceded with my my point of view. For the sake of the debate I will now oppose my original view point, I again would like to thank the Con for starting this topic for us all to realize that the world is truly beautiful the way it is, Thank you.

Con goes on to state: "Even if I could, I wouldn't take away the fact that people are prejudice. Racism is just a form a prejudice, and even though (I'm using black people only as an example) slavery was terrible, it strengthened people and made them join together for what they believed in. As you pointed out, most people would argue that the word we be a much better place with out man slaughter.... I mean war, drunk drivers, and drug dealers." I would now like the con to prove to the audience that the world is a better place with manslaughter, war, & drug dealers for her to win her point. I would like to attack the point of manslaughter, & how the world could do with out. Let us begin by defining manslaughter: (1) "The unjustifiable, inexcusable, and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation, and malice. The unlawful killing of a human being without any deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection." I would then like to quote Dana Diberardino's heart breaking story about her 18 year old daughter; (2) "The driver, a 18-year-old girl, was busy trying to fix her mirror when a drunk driver went through a stop sign and hit her in her left side. The car flipped twice, and landed in a ditch. She is pronounced "dead." the authorities are trying to contact her parents no-"
Just then, the phone started ringing. I screamed and dived for it. "Hello, Hello?!" I frantically said.
"Is this the parent of Melissa Sanchez?"
"Yes, yes..." Tears then flowed down as he explained what happened. I sobbed uncontrollably, and my husband began doing the same. Our little girl, the one who we had seen get scratched while riding her bike, get her heart broken by her first crush, was now dead." I would like to conclude this point with the question, "If Melissa Sanchez had continued to live that day, would life be better off than what it is now for their family?"

My opponent then goes on to say: "Take Vincent van Gogh. He had both emotional and self-confidence problems, and in the end, was so troubled he commit suicide. Now, as terrible as that is, he's one of the greatest artist known and it's because he was able to turn is grief and pain into beautiful pieces of art." For the Con to prove the validity of her statement she will need to prove that Vincent Van Gohs suffering was the reason his paintings are as beautiful as they are. Let me then take Leonardo Da Vinci another famous painter till this day, (3) "Leonardo was born on April 15, 1452, at the third hour of the night, in the Tuscan hill town of Vinci, in the lower valley of the Arno River in the territory of Florence. He was the illegitimate son of the wealthy Messer Piero Fruosino di Antonio da Vinci". After reading about Leonardo Da Vinci's life it is apparent to the reader that he has far less troubles than Vincent Van Goh. I would like Con to prove that Vincent Van Gohs paintings are much more beautiful than Leonardo Da Vinci's. Also that this is an apparent result to Vincent Van Gohs suffering in life and that these works of arts could not be achieved with out that suffering.

Con then recites a poem by Shel Selversteen, Land of The Happy:
There's this poem by Shel Selversteen. The Land of Happy:
Have you ever been to the land of happy?
Where everyone's happy all day.
They laugh and they sing, of the happiest things,
And every thing's all jolly and gay.
No one's ever unhappy in happy,
It's laugh and smiles galore.
I've been to the land of happy,
Man! What a bore!

To make my point I would like the con & the audience to visualize their dream car. I am now going to hypothetically give you this car, you have no payments on it & it will bring you great joy through out your life. Now I would like to ask this question, "Will you ever get bored of having this car, and if another car hit you would that make your car that much better?"

Lastly I quote the con as follows: "Like kids who say "I wish it was summer all year." No they don't if it was summer all year it'd get boring and always be hot. They like summer because it's a break from their normal school retain and they can do other things (like camp).". Let us remember our last summer, for a few of us it is awhile back. But I would like to point out that some people just enjoy doing nothing. I have many friends that can sit around all day long & would never go back to work. If they imagined a "perfect" world for themselves it would never become less as sweet as it is. My final task for the con is to prove why some people in the world are better off suffering in their misery and why not having a perfect world would be far less.

I again would like to thank the audience & the con for their time, I look forward to hearing the con's rebuttal.
=======================
Website References:
(1) http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...
(2) http://www.helium.com...
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
iBeSteve00

Con

You agree with me and yet still make me push to make my side of the debate further? My thoughts about this: You are awesome. I love people who make me think. I don't debate to be against someone or plead that my logic is better; I debate to present reasons for why I think the way I do and build off the person who I am debating with to become better. Learn. Grow.

Really, I just picked "con" out of the blue (or some other saying that doesn't actually mean what it says) because the topic isn't a statement like it's really suppose to be.

On your first point:
Alright, manSLAUGHTER was an exaggeration.

Manslaughter: (1) "The unjustifiable, inexcusable, and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation, and malice. The unlawful killing of a human being without any deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection."

Unjustifiable and inexcusable vary because they're really opinions. I might say belching in public is inexcusable while someone else might think it is excusable and find it funny/entertaining. In my opinion, war (I'm switching to war because that's originally where I pulled the word "manslaughter" from) comes out of a greed for power and/or fear. It IS intentional killing of other human beings without thought. I mean, of course the war is thought about, but a soldier is trained to kill without wavering. If they hesitate they could be killed themselves. Personally, I couldn't bear to live with myself knowing I've killed another person.

I had a friend who asked me this question (I'm only saying this, really, because it's something to think about): You are stuck in a concrete room, with lighting, miles under the ground with another person (doesn't really matter who) who's knocked out but can be awaken. All that's in the room is a pistol with one shot and some sleeping pills. It will take 12 hours for the drill to reach the room, but there won't be enough oxygen to last the both of you for that long. What do you do?

Now, back to the debate. Your second point, about Melissa Sanchez. Your question: "If Melissa Sanchez had continued to live that day, would life be better off than what it is now for their family?" There is no possible way for me answer this question. For all I know, if Melissa had lived, two days later she could have stole her parents credit card and drove them into bankruptcy. She could have became a thief, steal something and go to jail which would (most likely) sadden her parents who could only ask themselves "Where did we go wrong?"

Now, the point I think you were trying to make, was that drunk drivers kill many great people. Which, I would put as a "fail" of our generation. What I mean by this is that we (as human societies) took a wrong turn down a path. Most of the time failure is rejected because we didn't accomplish what we intended and/or aren't or didn't become that great philosopher we wanted to be as a child (example). But, we as humans need to stop rejecting failure and start learning from it. Yes you failed, yes drunk driving does not DIRECTLY benefit the people it has killed and the hangovers it has given. But, we as a society can learn from that and fix it. Build on it. Become better of it.

Quote: You cannot go through life without failure, unless you've lived so cautiously that you might as well have not lived at all. –J.K. Rowling.

Now, you ask me "to prove that Vincent Van Gohs suffering was the reason his paintings are as beautiful as they are." Technically, I cannot. But, I can give you my reasoning behind what is really an inference. Most, if not all, artist put their heart into their work, because it's their passion, it's what they love to do. Van Gohs paintings (I'm inferring) didn't come from happy, joyful inspiration, because that's not where his heart was. His heart (by this, I do mean feelings) was matted and stressed because of what he was going through. You cannot grieve for a person's death, if they have not died. The feeling's not there. His feelings weren't high and lively, that were low. Hurt. And art being his passion, he could have used that as an escape. Express his feelings and let it out. It is actually scientifically proven that stress and hatred and all those negative feelings can kill you. The brain works in weird ways.

You use Da Vinci as an example. I WILL NOT try to prove that Van Gohs paintings were better that his like you wish me too. Because they aren't. There are many types of beauty. Da Vinci is also (as you did point out) a very famous painter of today. His art was difference. I don't get what it is with society with "what's better? _____ or ____?" Why can't it just be different? Equal. Da Vinci's art came from a different source. And even if he wanted to paint like Van Goh, he couldn't. He didn't go through what Van Goh did. His heart wasn't in the same place. They both had their heart in art, but it's still not the same. Sure he might be able to copy a portrait, or use the same style. Hundreds of thousands of painters use pointillism (where you paint a picture with dots) but that doesn't mean they paint alike.

And, just on the subject of art, I would like to say this, and it doesn't really have anything to do with the debate (apologies if you find this pointless and a waste of time, if so, skip this, and the next). My friend loves to draw, and he's bloody good at it if I might add. He was flipping through one of his art books showing all the beautifully colored pictures he had drew, describing how he wanted the light to come from such and such angle and the specific colors he mixed for each one, etc.

At one pictured that particularly caught my eye, I stopped him. It was a drawing of a tree in the winter with no leaves. A black and white picture. The one that stuck out to me, if fact, did not have any vibrate colors or complex structure. it had detail, but not near as much as any of the others. No. Just a simple black and white drawing of a dead tree. It totally blew me away.

Moving on.

You asked the audience and I to visualize their dream car. Then post the question: "Will you ever get bored of having this car, and if another car hit you would that make your car that much better?" Possibly. It might be my dream car today, but in two years I might think it sucks and want whatever new thing has just been created (just to point out, I personally wouldn't be so wasteful and give up the car just because another might be slighter better or "cooler" looking). No, someone hitting my car would not make it any better, and in fact would irritate me. But, then there is a wide variety of things that COULD happen. I could go on the day pissed off and be a bad influence on everyone who I come in contact with, or the person that hit me could come out and apologies and upon talking to them I might just find my soul mate. Then, I would be grateful. So my car got damaged. That can be fixed, and besides, I just found the love of my life (hypothetically).

Then you take my example of "kids liking summer" (really, I shouldn't have said "kids" because many a people love the summer). "But I would like to point out that some people just enjoy doing nothing." Oh, I completely agree! I love to sit and do nothing. Frankly, I am never bored. Sit me to stare at a wall for a few hours, and you won't hear a single complaint (nor shall I think one). Having me and my thoughts? Lovely. Technically, it's physically impossible to do nothing. Breathing, sitting, standing, LIVING, is all something. But, taking what I infer you are meaning, which would be doing the least amount of anything as possible, that's great.

Are you freaking kidding me!?! I still have so much more to say! I only have about 130 characters left. Con, if you could please make some kind of cheap two word reply and then I can post the rest of my debate after that. It's about another 750 words.
Evolution078

Pro

Ladies & Gentleman I would like to begin by quoting Con which goes as follows; "Pro, if you could please make some kind of cheap two word reply and then I can post the rest of my debate after that. It's about another 750 words." Go ahead & post the rest of your debate Con. I will be in San Diego for the next few days so If I don't reply until the last minute that is why.
Debate Round No. 3
iBeSteve00

Con

First off, I would like to thank the "pro" for agreeing to let me finish my argument. Going over the limit, it was very long, so thank you "pro" for your time and efforts.

I would like to start continuing my argument by making a quote connecting where I left off.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want." –Calvin from Calvin & Hobbes (don't know exactly which book) created by Bill Waterson.

I do want to apologize, because in my second post I said "You can know what light is, if you do not know dark." but what I meant to say was "You canNOT know what light is, if you do not know what dark is." Which brings to my point about "kids liking summer." You pointed out that you have friends that could sit at home and never go back to work and be fully content. Doing nothing at home probably would become mighty boring mighty fast, if they didn't know what work was. My point was if the kids didn't know what school was they probably wouldn't enjoy summer as much.

I have this friend. BOY! Is she SARCASTIC! She has to comment on everything. She mocks people (in that friendly "not really trying to hurt your feelings" way) and has to make a joke about everything. Really, she's quiet hilarious. I nicked named her "meany-butt" with all the scoffing remarks she's thrown at me.

She has told me she loves me (in the best friend kind of way). Twice. If she told me so every other day it wouldn't mean as much to me. I like it when's she's nice. When she gives me compliments and praises me and tells me how lucky she is to have me as a friend. It doesn't happen very often. That's why it's special. And means so much. Because when she says it, she's serious and means it.

Summer, doesn't happen all year. So when it comes, the break of it is all the more special. You said yourself in your first post "Yes I would take a free car win the lottery but it doesn't buy you happiness. If I was rich right now & I had 100+ cars that free car wouldn't mean to much to me at this point." Not winning the lottery and being rich make that one free car all the more enjoyable.

Having pain and grief make the happiness and joy in your life mean so much more and makes you cherish it.

You state "I have many friends that can sit around all day long & would never go back to work. If they imagined a "perfect" world for themselves it would never become less as sweet as it is." Their perfect world could be hell (apologies if you take offence for me using "hell") for the other six billion people on the earth. Which wouldn't be a perfect world. Not even close. The only way to have everyone happy is if everyone imagined up a world of their own and went to live on it.

For me, earth is my "perfect" world. Precisely because it's not perfect. So many people strive to be perfect, to have everything "right" as they see fit. I've seen someone like this. And it destroyed them. They drove themselves mad. Now, I'm not saying don't try and change the world. The fact that we do is a reason why I love humanity.

Now, to your final task. "….to prove why some people in the world are better off suffering in their misery and why not having a perfect world would be far less." As I just finished explaining, there is no such thing as a perfect world. And as for "…. why some people in the world are better off suffering in their misery…." In my opinion, people choose to be miserable unless they have some mental illness and that itself makes it pure impossible for them to be happy. Someone could murder your one and only love. You choose to grieve and let out those feelings of their lost. You also choose to dwell on it and never move on. You choose to be miserable about it. No one can make you do anything you don't want to do, unless they physically force you to do so directly.

Someone could hold a gun up to you and demand your money. They aren't forcing you to give it to them. You give it to them freely in hopes of not being shot. You can choose to disobey them and possible get shot. Unless that grab your hand and have greater strength than you, force your hand around the bundle of money and then hold your hand out so they can take it, they haven't forced you to do anything.

In conclusion, I would like to thank the "pro" for all of their time and effort put into theirs points. I look forward to reading the pro's responds.
Evolution078

Pro

Ladies & gentleman I again would like to thank Pro for continuing on with this
debate regardless of the fact that she had ceded to my opinion. Seeing how I
have two full rounds to debate, my responses will be short.

I would like to quote Pros rebuttal; "Unjustifiable and inexcusable vary because
they're really opinions. I might say belching in public is inexcusable while
someone else might think it is excusable and find it funny/entertaining."
I cede to this argument, But it doesn't hold against the definition of
manslaughter used in the court system.

I do not know how the cement room is relevant to the matter but seeing how
you use less oxygen while sleeping, take the sleeping pills.

Point 3 I cede with the fact that there is no way to say that the world may be
better with out her.

I would like to quote Pro again "Now, you ask me "to prove that Vincent Van Gohs
suffering was the reason his paintings are as beautiful as they are." Technically,
I cannot. But, I can give you my reasoning behind what is really an inference.
Most, if not all, artist put their heart into their work, because it's their
passion, it's what they love to do. Van Gohs paintings (I'm inferring) didn't
come from happy, joyful inspiration, because that's not where his heart was. His
heart (by this, I do mean feelings) was matted and stressed because of what he
was going through." Pro repeatedly assumes that the artists work come from the
pain with in his heart based upon his life. Pro fails to prove that this is an
accurate statement. Who is not to say that the artists work did not come from
a love in his life that shined more brilliantly than the suffering that had
consumed him?

Pro goes into saying how she will not compare the two artists work, I cede to the
fact that they are both brilliant. But Pro has failed to prove that Vincent Van
Gohs work is a result to his pain he had felt & nothing else.

I cede with your hypothetical love life.

Your last point in round 3 I will take it that means you cede with the fact that
some people love to do nothing & yes they would never grow tired of something
(Our hypothetical summer).

You go into the hypothetical summer again in round four even after agreeing which
contradicts yourself entirely. New video games will continue to come out just
recently Halo Reach, Medal Of Honor, Call Of Duty, Fable 3, Fall Out. My point
here is the world would still spin & life would continue if I had sat around
doing nothing. Would I tire of playing all the sweet video games coming out?
No, & many people would agree, If it was constantly summer I'd always be constantly
entertained.

I would like to quote Pro; "She has told me she loves me (in the best friend kind
of way). Twice. If she told me so every other day it wouldn't mean as much to me."
I just went on to ask my wife if she would ever tire of me telling her I loved her,
She has responded with a simple no. I am sure there are many other people that
would agree that hearing their loved ones say "I love you" is a great feeling and
will never get sick of hearing it. This therefore proves Pros point inaccurate
for all people.

You go on to quote myself from round 1; "Yes I would take a free car win the
lottery but it doesn't buy you happiness. If I was rich right now & I had 100+
cars that free car wouldn't mean to much to me at this point." Well in the end
I'm not rich and many people are not. So you know what I would take that free car.
If I was rich & had 100 cars I would destroy them, drop them from cliffs,
race them etc... If life was perfect I could do everything I wanted until the
day I died. It might be your personal opinion to say it is that much better but
in the end not every one would say the same.

I am going to pass up a few of your redundancy's Pro because I am running out of
room. I would like to quote this from you; As I just finished explaining, there
is no such thing as a perfect world. And as for "…. why some people in the world
are better off suffering in their misery…." In my opinion, people choose to be
miserable." In Afghanistan, Woman would have to walk behind their husbands. They
would not talk or hold hands they are treated as dogs. They do not work because
their culture does not allow them to. If they try to rebel they get beat or killed.
There is nothing around but desert, some one could not survive if they had tried
to walk more than a couple of miles. This is not to say the entire populace of
Afghanistan is like this. My point is this, some of these people do not choose to
be here, to live a life like they do. They are bread into a culture. Who are you
to say that they choose to live that life? Some do but I can assure you that
others do not.

I would like to thank Pro again for starting this debate. I would like to
apologize if I could not cover anything with in the content, Or did not go more
in depth. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
Debates are about resolutions, not questions. When a question is proposed, it seems that usually the the proposer is answering "yes" and wants to defend the affirmation. In this debated on seems to say, "Not much should change in the present world" and Pro starts out agreeing, then rambles. the best I can make of it is that Con has the best of the arguments, since Pro seems to mainly agree. The debate is a mess. Pro has the burden of proof, but didn't try to prove anything.

Pro should propose a clear resolution and give reasons why the resolution is true.
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
Hehe, this is a mostly opinion so its better if its left UNVOTED.
Posted by iBeSteve00 6 years ago
iBeSteve00
Even thought we both agree, I feel like I lost. Oh well, happens to all good debaters.... I guess I need to work on my debating skills.
Posted by iBeSteve00 6 years ago
iBeSteve00
Well, there are many things we COULD debate about, seeing that we don't agree with each other. This was just the first thing that came to my head, because a friend asked me that question and he debated against my answer. No other argument comes to mind at the moment, but, I love debating so if you have anything, please voice your opinion. I like debating, not to be against anyone, but because it makes me think.

Oh, and I'll see to it that I'll reply to your points tomorrow. Thursday.
Posted by Evolution078 6 years ago
Evolution078
For the sake of the next few rounds is there anything else you would like to debate about? There is not much of a debate if we are agreed on the fact that the world is beautiful the way it is.
Posted by TallIndianKid 6 years ago
TallIndianKid
that was a beautiful speech evolution078 haha
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Hound 6 years ago
Hound
iBeSteve00Evolution078Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by I-am-a-panda 6 years ago
I-am-a-panda
iBeSteve00Evolution078Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
iBeSteve00Evolution078Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03