The Instigator
cowpie1998
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
Thaddeus
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

Life breeding hate

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
Pro Tied Con
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,107 times Debate No: 15401
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (7)

 

cowpie1998

Pro

Life breeds hate; this is proven by:
Life-Sexual relationship
Sexual relationship-commitment
Commitment-anxiety
Anxiety-Jealousy
Jealousy-Hate
Therefore Life=Hate
Thaddeus

Con

Thank you Pro for creating the debate.
Since pro has not formally clarified the resolution I shall do so; "the process of being alive is what causes hate".

Whilst it is true that only living things can experience hate (to our knowledge anyway), this does not alone reasonably lead to the conclusion that it is the process of being alive which causes it.
I shall first rebut pro's arguments and then outline a counter argument.
(I shall be interpreting all "-" as meaning causes)

1. Life - sexual relationship
Yes life is (hopefully) a prerequisite for this, however to describe it as the sole cause would be woefully limited. Also it can be shown to be false. Under your arguments only someone who has sexual relationships could feel anger. I am a virgin, and have felt anger many times. [Source - myself, I just asked and I told me]
2. Sexual relationship - commitment
Again false. There are many relationships which do not lead to commitment, whilst both elements of the relationship are perfectly capable of feeling hate.
3. Commitment - anxiety
Elaboration required. I see no reason why commitment should need to lead to anxiety.
4. Anxiety - Jealousy
Occasionally. Not contingently however.
5.
Jealousy - Hate
Even rarer than above. Again not contigently.

Thus the conclusion that to live is to hate is false and unsupported.

Counter-argument
Given that I believe that this is unnecessary considering the above, I shall be brief.
Plants are alive, yet it cannot be shown that they can feel hate. Therefore the assertion that the process of living is equivilent and the cause of hate is false.
I await your response.
Debate Round No. 1
cowpie1998

Pro

Thank you. Life is breed from sex, therefore it is a survival instinct. Sex occurs, therefore someone living had sex.
Sexual relationship is an instinct in which on commits to one another (rape not included). We choose mates based on who would make better babies. This makes a level of commitment.
When someone has something will covet
it. Therefore, commitment
makes jealousy
Jealousy is a type of anger, therefore for it to occur, anger
must
Thaddeus

Con

"Life is breed from sex, therefore it is a survival instinct. Sex occurs, therefore someone living had sex.
Sexual relationship is an instinct in which on commits to one another (rape not included). We choose mates based on who would make better babies. This makes a level of commitment.
When someone has something will covet
it. Therefore, commitment
makes jealousy
Jealousy is a type of anger, therefore for it to occur, anger
must"
This argument makes little sense and is mainly a rewording of the last argument. You have failed to demonstrate how this means that life is the cause and is equivilent to hate.
Pro has not made any coherent argument or response to my counter argument.
I urge the voters to vote con. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
cowpie1998ThaddeusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: countering the retard
Vote Placed by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
cowpie1998ThaddeusTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: CVB
Vote Placed by KeytarHero 5 years ago
KeytarHero
cowpie1998ThaddeusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's argument was largely incoherent, and his second round argument was just a re-hash of his first round argument, which Con showed to be unsupported.
Vote Placed by Chrysippus 6 years ago
Chrysippus
cowpie1998ThaddeusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Logic failure on Pro's part, combined with an inability to communicate clearly, gives this debate to Con.
Vote Placed by Lexicaholic 6 years ago
Lexicaholic
cowpie1998ThaddeusTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: 1. B/A: Pro/Con. This would have been easy to win if Pro had thought a little harder about the resolution. 2. Conduct: Tie, nothing to incite someone. 3. S&G: On the "G" of S&G, Con, by a mile. 4. CA: Con. Pro should have said (a) hate exists, (b) only living things experience hate, and (c) living things breed more living things which in turn are the only repositories for hate, hence: life breeds hate. This was not done, however. 5. RS: Tie, no sources.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 6 years ago
socialpinko
cowpie1998ThaddeusTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: con refuted pro's weirdly worded assertions.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
cowpie1998ThaddeusTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro asserted, con refuted with warrant.