The Instigator
MASTERY
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
Benshapiro
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

My opponent picks the potential topic.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Benshapiro
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/20/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 457 times Debate No: 49532
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

MASTERY

Pro



Welcome to the debate.



This is a special debate, with special formats as follows.

FORMAT

1st round-Pro Introduce the parameters
Self-explanatory
1st round-Con Provide the possible arguments
Provide ten possible arguments for me to choose from. Do NOT try to define or explain the arguments, as I can interpret the arguments any way I wish. Anything here should only be greetings or topics. I decide which side I wish to be, IGNORE the fact that debate.org says that I'm pro. The debate topics have to be somewhat different, to prevent ten rewording of a single topic. I can change the topic you provide slightly as well for the debate to be a fun experience. At the start of round 2 I will underline and bold the confirmed topic.
2nd round-Pro Argument & selection of topic.
I will provide a confirmed topic here, define the topic and supply my arguments as necessary. My side (pro/con) will also be clearly stated here. Please cite all research and arguments. Please provide evidence for all arguments.
2nd round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
3rd round-Pro Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
3rd round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
4th round-Pro Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
4th round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
5th round-Pro Conclusion & Rebuttal.
Rebut arguments and provide a conclusion in this round. No new arguments.
5th round-Con Conclusion & Rebuttal.
Rebut arguments and provide a conclusion in this round. No new arguments.

No abusive language please. The topics that con picks should not be abusive. The topic has to be debatable worldwide. "My opponent picks the topic." is only a placeholder for real topic, so you may NOT post "I am not posting any topics, therefore I win" or something along those lines. Also, please post topics that are easy to debate on both sides.

Failure to follow the rules and format stated above results in a full 7-point forfeit to the opposing team.

PLEASE READ THE FORMAT AND RULES.

I hope we have a good debate.

Time limit for each argument: 1 day.
Character limit: 5000

Thank you.
Benshapiro

Con

1) Nintendo

2) chlamydia

3) hitler

4) elderly people driving

5) economics

6) toilet paper testers

7) jenkum

8) bubblicious bubble gum

9) goiters

10) tourettes

That list is pretty expansive.
Debate Round No. 1
MASTERY

Pro

Definition/Selection
I would like to thank my opponent for accepting my debate and supplying me with ten potential topics. I interpret the topics as whether they are good/bad. I have chosen the topic "Goiters are mostly good" and I am con. I define "goiters" as "a swelling of the neck resulting from enlargement of the thyroid gland" and "good" as "to be desired or approved of". I inserted a most so that you do not have to argue that goiters are completely good.

Arguments
There are many reasons why goiters are not good. Since something must have caused goiters, something bad must have happened. For example, iodine deficiency can cause goiters. "When iodine requirements are not met, the thyroid may no longer be able to synthesize sufficient amounts of thyroid hormone. The resulting low-level of thyroid hormones in the blood is the principal factor responsible for the series of functional and developmental abnormalities, collectively referred to as IDD. Iodine deficiency is a significant cause of mental developmental problems in children, including implications on reproductive functions and lowering of IQ levels in school-aged children".[1] As you can see, iodine deficiency is very bad. Since iodine deficiency causes goiters, goiters as well are bad.

[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Thank you.
Benshapiro

Con

You've essentially tried to make any debate practically unwinnable by choosing whether you're pro/con for any topic with any "argument" that you decide to create based on your interpretation of the topic which is pretty cheap. You could've chosen Hitler as a topic and chose to be "con" that Hitler mostly was good.

What I mean is, you really haven't "interpreted the argument" because I haven't made any arguments. I've only providing a list of topics even though I was supposed to provide topics with arguments but by inventing an argument with one of my topics from the previous round you've accepted that my topic counted as an argument. So you've changed a topic into an argument which wasn't even part of the rules of the debate. Therefore you've broken your own rules.

Even though the spirit of this debate has turned out to be really quite cheap because con is essentially interpreting any topic into any argument (even though an argument was never presented in the first place) and choosing any side he wishes to be on, I'll play along.

Goiters, even though they are a result of iodine deficiency and can result in serious problems, are mostly good because they are an obvious warning to anyone that has developed a goiter and an obvious warning to those around them.



If somebody had a goiter it would be obvious that they need medical attention immediately. Since goiters are very noticeable, they are mostly good because they are an alarming warning that you are iodine deficient. If goiters weren't noticeable, people would be very iodine deficient and probably never know. Therefore goiters are mostly good because they act as an obvious and noticeable warning to those who didn't know they were vitamin deficient.

Now, notice I said "mostly good" which means that the goiter by nature is not all good because the vitamin deficiency that causes this sweling is very bad. But mostly it is good because it acts as a warning to those that have one and to those around them that are vitamin deficient.
Debate Round No. 2
MASTERY

Pro

I apologize for the topic/argument mistake. I meant my opponent provides 10 arguments. I will fix this in the next 'opponent chooses topic' debate.

REBUTTAL
Goiters, even though they are a result of iodine deficiency and can result in serious problems, are mostly good because they are an obvious warning to anyone that has developed a goiter and an obvious warning to those around them.

The warning does not make goiters mostly good. Since goiters are simply providing a warning to themselves. For example, would goiters be classified good if goiters themselves create symptoms which indicate goiters? Of course not, the goiters still cause harm, but just make it obvious.

If somebody had a goiter it would be obvious that they need medical attention immediately. Since goiters are very noticeable, they are mostly good because they are an alarming warning that you are iodine deficient. If goiters weren't noticeable, people would be very iodine deficient and probably never know. Therefore goiters are mostly good because they act as an obvious and noticeable warning to those who didn't know they were vitamin deficient.

Goiters, while indicate a person as iodine deficient, is a indicator that itself leads to something even worse. Dry skin, while not as harmful as a goiters can easily indicate iodine deficiency.

Now, notice I said "mostly good" which means that the goiter by nature is not all good because the vitamin deficiency that causes this swelling is very bad. But mostly it is good because it acts as a warning to those that have one and to those around them that are vitamin deficient.

ARGUMENT
Goiters can cause breathing difficulty, as they block up airways. This results in lack of oxygen to the brain. Without oxygen, many health related problems such as difficulty concentrating come along. Suffocation occurs without oxygen. Air is crucial to human survival. Goiters stop precious air from entering our lungs, thus risking ourselves.

Thank you.

Benshapiro

Con

Benshapiro forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
MASTERY

Pro

My opponent has forfeited the previous round.
Benshapiro

Con

Benshapiro forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Benshapiro

Con

Benshapiro forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by The_Scapegoat_bleats 2 years ago
The_Scapegoat_bleats
People, this is IMPORTANT!

Look at the rules by Mastery before voting.
Following his own rules, he was NOT ALLOWED TO POST ANY ARGUMENTS BEYOND ROUND 2, and violating his rules is to be punished with a 7-point-loss!

"Failure to follow the rules and format stated above results in a full 7-point forfeit to the opposing team."
"2nd round-Pro Argument & selection of topic.
I will provide a confirmed topic here, define the topic and supply my arguments as necessary. My side (pro/con) will also be clearly stated here. Please cite all research and arguments. Please provide evidence for all arguments.
2nd round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
3rd round-Pro Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
3rd round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
4th round-Pro Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments.
4th round-Con Argument & Rebuttal.
Provide your arguments and rebuttal in this round. Again, please cite research provide evidence for arguments. Pro Conclusion & Rebuttal.
5th round-Con Conclusion & Rebuttal.
Rebut arguments and provide a conclusion in this round. No new arguments.
5th round-Con Conclusion & Rebuttal.
Rebut arguments and provide a conclusion in this round. No new arguments."

Especially ROUND 5 is RESERVED for his opponent alone!

Vote against Mastery.
Posted by MASTERY 2 years ago
MASTERY
Benshapiro, sorry for the confusion about topics and arguments. My mistake; I should have written arguments.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by The_Scapegoat_bleats 2 years ago
The_Scapegoat_bleats
MASTERYBenshapiroTied
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: RFD in the comments. Mastery broke his own rules and demanded a 7-point-loss himself.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
MASTERYBenshapiroTied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeits
Vote Placed by Relativist 2 years ago
Relativist
MASTERYBenshapiroTied
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:33 
Reasons for voting decision: The resolution was hard for Benshapiro to disapprove, its like saying 'the medical condition cancer is mostly good', this resolution is incredibly biased towards those opposing it. Likewise with 'goiters are mostly good'. The biased resolution, as i intrepret it, are on par with Benshapiro's repeated forfeit of breaking the rules, Thus both are equally guilty. I will score this based on arguments, The resolution is also too general. Benshapiro argued this on symptom advantages while MASTERY was busy in his medical argument. Benshapiro is correct that a warning is better than none, which somewhat satisfy the resolution that it is 'good' but the additional argument by pro on goiter medical conditions seems to level the debate. So its a tie.