The Instigator
Luden
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
MyDinosaurHands
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Obligation precludes sincerity, or in being sincere one must ignore obligation.

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 2 votes the winner is...
MyDinosaurHands
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/14/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 565 times Debate No: 63204
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Luden

Pro

Whereas, to be obliged is to forgo the privilege of sincerity, and,
Whereas, an obligatory action is one performed under the pretense of the obligation and,
Whereas, sincerity is the freedom from all pretense and,
Whereas, a sincere act must be a desired act regardless of the pretense and,
Whereas, it isn't the act asked by obligation that affects the sincerity, rather, it is the idea of obligatory action, the same act for under the same circumstances without the phrase obligatory would make the act sincere so,

Therefore, any action performed under obligation is one performed insincerely.
MyDinosaurHands

Con

As I understand this, my opponent is claiming that one cannot be sincere when performing an obligation, and nor can one perform a sincere act if it is an obligation.

For starters, definitions:

Sincere: "having or showing true feelings that are expressed in an honest way"[1]
Obligation: "something by which a person is bound or obliged to do certain things, and which arises out of a sense of duty or results from custom, law, etc."[2]

In order to meet his resolution, my opponent would have to somehow show that nobody, ever in the grand scale of things, acted out of both obligation and sincerity. This is impossible, because he cannot truly know what every person's actions meant to that person.

However, one can think of many examples where one could conceivably feel both. Let's take an opera singer, for example. An opera singer might have a contract that obligates them to go on tour and sing and whatever. In being bound to that action however, that opera singer could also sincerely want to sing, obligation notwithstanding. In fact, that opera singer is probably in that situation of obligation because of his sincerity in regards to singing.

Of course, one could raise the point that the singer may feel sincere, but he also feels the pressure of obligation upon him. This may very well be true, however, my opponent needs to prove that 'Obligation precludes sincerity', in other words, with obligation present, no sincerity may be present. Obviously, given the above example and logic, he cannot do this.

Thanks for reading.

Sources:
[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
[2] http://dictionary.reference.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Luden

Pro

Luden forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Luden

Pro

I'm sorry my sons have been sick this past week. I would like to continue this debate but I don't know how to postpone it. So I guess I just forfeit. Good points all around. Your assumption that I would need to personally prove all obligatory actions to be insincere was off, though. Point of logos, I would only need argue the logical inconsistencies between the two terms. Regardless, I would love to debate this some other time with you if you would again accept the challenge.
MyDinosaurHands

Con

So that's a forfeit. Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
I think we need to pick and choose obligations. If someone asks me to work, and I accept, that is an obligation. Nothing should keep me from fulfilling my obligation. Even a better offer.That is keeping your word, even if it hurts you. The most valuable thing in a man's life is his word. If a man's word is good, he is a good man. If his word cannot be trusted, he is an evil man.

If a man accepts an obligation whose word is questionable, then his sincerity is questionable.
Posted by Luden 2 years ago
Luden
VelCrow, for the sake of the debate, I can take that position, but as a rule I do try to absolutely avoid absolutes. I just didn't want to muddy the opening statement with qualifying terms. However, if the CON argument in round 1 takes the position of of a generalized absolute, I will gladly rebuttal. Thank you for your comment.
Posted by VelCrow 2 years ago
VelCrow
Are you saying that ALL Obligatory actions are never sincere actions? If yes then I would gladly take up your challenege
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
LudenMyDinosaurHandsTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct and Arguments go to Con. Conduct due to Pro's forfeit in Round 2, and Arguments due to Pro's concession in Round 3. Both played a role in Pro failing to provide any rebuttals to the arguments raised by Con, and thus failing to maintain the BOP. Clear win for Con.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
LudenMyDinosaurHandsTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: A concession. Unfortunately, Pro did actually forfeit a round, and so loses conduct.