The Instigator
Antonio12
Con (against)
Losing
10 Points
The Contender
Radicalguy44
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points

On balance, internet does more harm than good

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 4 votes the winner is...
Radicalguy44
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/30/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 9,172 times Debate No: 11590
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

Antonio12

Con

I will allow my opponent to start. Please make this an LD debate
Radicalguy44

Pro

Hello. I am Radicalguy44 and I will be debating PRO for the following resolution:

On balance, internet does more harm than good.
In this debate, I will prove that on balance, there are more dangers, than beneficial s when using the internet.

Definitions:
On balance = One proving that there is more of one than the other
Internet = Online source in which people communicate with each other
Harm = Danger

CONTENTION 1 : The internet has a lot of threats in it. One of them being viruses. According to Norton Symantec, they can not cover every single virus that is out there, because some are just too strong. It's true, there are some viruses that can't be put off, and some viruses that even put you in danger of seeing inappropriate stuff. You may have not been doing anything incorrectly, but harm can still come your way.
SUBPOINT A: Not only are there viruses, but there are also inappropriate websites that reach the incorrect eyes (i.e = minors) These children suddenly get these pictures in their computer, and out of curiosity, fall under the trap put in. This is not something we want to continue, but merely something we want to stop. If this doesn't prove internet is dangerous, nothing does.

CONTENTION 2: Excess of hours spent on the computer damages health. This includes internet sites. This proves also that internet does a lot of harm. Sure, these may be productive hours, but hey, it's still harming your health

Finally, I'd like to say that all the PRO has to do is prove that internet does more harm than good, and I am not forced to disagree that internet does some good. I can admit it does some good, but when you compare them, the negative sides take place

Please vote PRO!
Debate Round No. 1
Antonio12

Con

Hello I am Antonio12.I actually know my opponent(Marin) and this my first debate on Debate.org

On balance, internet does more harm than good.

Definitions:
On balance = One proving that there is more of one than the other
Internet = Online source in which people communicate with each other
Harm = Danger

First I will attack my opponent then state my case.

I have to show that the Internet can be good at least one time not that it is always good.

First I will state my case,then attack my opponents

Now I will state my case.
Value:human life-the life of human
Criterion:parental supervision-that parents are always present when kids use the computer

My value human life is related to this case because words like kids ,minors,and parents will be used and they are all humans.

My criterion parental supervision is used to avoid kids seeing things they shouldn't see

Contention 1:the internet is used to communicate with people around the world
Like if you try to call someone from Brazil to china chances are that you won't be able to.
But with Internet you email anyone around the world.

Contention2:If we don't use something,chances are that we will lose it
For example if you don't use your brain by thinking alot it will kind of make you dumber.

My opponent stated in his contention 1"Not only are there viruses, but there are also inappropriate websites that reach the incorrect eyes (i.e = minors)" that is where my criterion comes into play if there are parents present they can put safe search and watch that kids aren't seeing inappropriate stuff and also he said "One of them being viruses." with parental supervision parents can tell kids not to open emails and stuff.

My opponent stated in his contention 2 "Excess of hours spent on the computer damages health. This includes internet sites. This proves also that internet does a lot of harm. Sure, these may be productive hours, but hey, it's still harming your health" This is where parental supervision comes in parents can limit computer time so your health isn't harmed.
Also my opponent is sort of contradicting his contention 2 because he said"Sure, these may be productive hours, but hey, it's still harming your health" he used a computer or some sort of electronic to write his case and that goes against his contention2.
His value and criterion are non-existent.
Vote for Neg
Radicalguy44

Pro

Hello kind sir. Welcome to debate.org

I will first like to give a road map of what I'll do. First I"ll attack my opponents case and then defend mine.

1) My opponent's value is Human Life which he said is related because we are all humans. This is arbitrary to the argument presented. With or without the internet, we'll still have human life. His value actually helps me, since humans are damaged with the internet, by getting abusive pages.

2) The criteria for my opponent does not stand either for the next two reasons. One, parents CAN NOT be supervising childrens' activities online. Also, even with parental controls, inappropriate websites pop up, so parental supervision does not stop the internet by harming others.

3) "Contention 1:the internet is used to communicate with people around the world
Like if you try to call someone from Brazil to china chances are that you won't be able to.
But with Internet you email anyone around the world"

My opponent says that the internet is used to communicate with people around the world. Obviously this has it's setbacks. There are easy ways to fake one's identity, therefore his contention 1 does not stand. There are way too many dangers when chatting online

4) "Contention2:If we don't use something,chances are that we will lose it
For example if you don't use your brain by thinking alot it will kind of make you dumber"

This is VERY arbitrary to what we are speaking about. The point is not to eliminate the internet completely, but just merely to state that is harmful. There are good things about the internet, just that the harm overpowers the benefits.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now on to defend my case

1) "that is where my criterion comes into play if there are parents present they can put safe search and watch that kids aren't seeing inappropriate stuff and also he said "One of them being viruses." with parental supervision parents can tell kids not to open emails and stuff."

That is not the point. Sometimes these images pop up instantaneously, and parental controls won't do anything about it. You'll still get it, neverhteless

2) "he used a computer or some sort of electronic to write his case and that goes against his contention2.
His value and criterion are non-existent."

I do not see how this contradicts my point. I am not trying to prove that the internet is 100% bad, just that it does more harm then good. Therefore using a computer is not contradicting my point at all

When we look at all the things that the internet has to offer, we'll find good things, but a lot more harmful things, that my opponent has failed to attack

Please vote PRO!
~Radicalguy44
Debate Round No. 2
Antonio12

Con

Antonio12 forfeited this round.
Radicalguy44

Pro

My opponent has forfeited this round, therefore there is a hole in the flow. I believe that the internet does some good, but overall it harms individuals for the previous reasons I have said before

Please vote AFF/PRO!
~Radicalguy44
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Radicalguy44 4 years ago
Radicalguy44
Obviously this debate is hard. But if my opponent does not prove it, then he looses. There should not be any set minds on this, you should vote in accord to who debates better, not what really happened
Posted by bombmaniac 4 years ago
bombmaniac
i must say this debate i ridiculous. pro cannot possibly win. consider it for just a minute. nations that do not ave acess to the educational facilities and resources that we have here in the developed world, can use the internet to get that information. pornography, malware, and 4chan is on the opposite end of the spectrum. maybe focus on Wikipedia, etymology online, wiki answers, all the medical databases available online. all the scientific databases and resources online. besides, most of the malware is contained in the pornography/pirating/4chan end of the internet, which many people avoid anyway, or simply do not know about. think about online shopping. think bout the social connectivity. think about all the positive communities that have sprung up as a result of the internet. the vast amount of self help, and advice sites that have sprung up. there is no comparison. on balnce the internet does more good than harm. no question about it.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Koopin 4 years ago
Koopin
Antonio12Radicalguy44Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Antonio12 4 years ago
Antonio12
Antonio12Radicalguy44Tied
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 
Vote Placed by SirColton 4 years ago
SirColton
Antonio12Radicalguy44Tied
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:34 
Vote Placed by Radicalguy44 4 years ago
Radicalguy44
Antonio12Radicalguy44Tied
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:07