The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
1 Points

Is online debate good?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 2/11/2016 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 656 times Debate No: 86292
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)




Yes, of course online debating is good since it promotes one's potential and also increases one's vocabulary.

We all have experienced this as we have been online debating by using

Online debating reveals what we are and we can be.

To keep's one position in an organised manner and time to time which takes time to master.

Hence, online debating is helpful.


Online debates are a waste of time because the majority of voters have below average intelligence and therefore can't grasp the points put through by those with higher I.Q's.
For example, if a blind man was to debate the color of an orange with someone who can see, the blind man would win if the majority of voters were also blind.
Because all the A.I's agree with each other they will never learn or even realize that they are mistaken. Whats worse is that they will propagate their erroneous beliefs on others.
Debate Round No. 1


The true motive of debating is to get a result for the topic being debated on.Conclusion is necessary.People have mistaken this fact and have started to prove their side by abusing etc.If a reader does not understand what the debaters want to say then it is no fault of the debater's.The contender accepts a challenge because he thinks he can fight up his topic but if the readers are not able to grasp the idea, it is obviously not the debater's problem.Another thing which is required to be told is that the topic is whether online debating is good and NOT whether online debate is good for voters.We must not forget the personal benefits online debating. This may sound a bit misanthropological but we should know that before serving others we must be ourselves well-fed.Another thing that you obviously don't know is whether the maximum of voters' IQ is below that of the debaters'. You also did not give a source to give a support to your opinion.
So you should not hurt the sentiments of voters


In the 1800's Sir Isaac Newton penned the following, "The relationship between light and color is arbitrary. There is nothing intrinsically blue about light with a short wavelength or red about light with a long wavelength. Color is merely the bodies way of letting us know what wavelength of light is present."
He is obviously talking about qualia. Color exists only in our perceptions and does not exist objectively. Yet 70% of the population believes color is intrinsic of an object, ie, an apple is green. 25% of the population believes color is intrinsic of light, ie, that the light being reflected by the apple is green. And only 5% of the population realize the truth. This is not a personal belief but rather a scientific fact. Scientists have even pinpointed the exact location in the brain where colors are created.
Yet in a recent poll I asked the question, "Is color a property of light or does color exist only in the mind?" and guess which statement got more votes. Voters are AI's.
Debate Round No. 2
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Furyan5 2 years ago
Not hiding. Leaving you to draw a conclusion, or not. What conclusions you draw says something about you. What you see as my motivation is a reflection of your way of thinking.
Posted by Pushpesh 2 years ago
I understand what you want to convey but what I am trying to make you understand is that hiding your views is not your motive and you should make clear what you want to say. If you are hiding, it implies that all your views are not factual. Truth does not need a blanket, a lie does.
Posted by Furyan5 2 years ago
No. But I can see how you reached that conclusion. If I give you my motive I am spoonfeeding you. This is what passes for intelligence in this day and age. People repeat what they are taught without understanding. Think about it a bit more.
Posted by Pushpesh 2 years ago
Your last argument does not make any sense Furyan5. Your motive is not clear. What you want to prove is that voters are foolish?
Posted by Furyan5 2 years ago
deton ylud
Posted by geho89 2 years ago
That does not exclude the fact that some people join to troll or just to post their opinions instead of having rational debates. Since there is no definition or criteria for "good", I feel this will be a back and forth of examples of good online debates and bad online debates. If this is the case, then this debate will be a bad debate in my opinion.
Posted by CodingSource 2 years ago
Anybody who accepted the Con position will never get any votes. That's the reason why we joined DDO.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by CodingSource 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides didn't provide any sources, although Con quoted Newton. However, Con's arguments are not clear and in fact, it needs elaboration why his argument is misleading to the question given by the Instigator.