The Instigator
Aerogant
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AlexanderOc
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

People Treat Debates Like Robotic Systems Rather Than Human Experiences In Questioning

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...
AlexanderOc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/20/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 647 times Debate No: 60732
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (13)
Votes (2)

 

Aerogant

Pro

Therefore debates are moot, for they do not appreciate nor propagate on the grounds of humanity. It is inarguable that a "debate" is not justified in questioning humanity, based off of inhumanity, thus this is to say that if you debate like a machine, your heart and mind are out of the question - period.
AlexanderOc

Con

I'm accepting this debate, not to show how the resolution false, but to show how easy it is to win a debate against aerogant.

Make your case. Stop making claims.
Debate Round No. 1
Aerogant

Pro

When you debate like a machine, you prove to everyone that you have lost your enthusiasm you had as a child. This enthusiasm is what many geniuses have called the "the genesis of genius". "Enthusiasm" is another word for "passion". Wise men do not speak like machines - they speak like beating hearts containing vials of the Universe. As well as demonstrating that you have no heart and mind, as to be a machine is to remove humanity and practice psychopathy. The machine turns the human mind into a business; an industry that feeds without satiation.
AlexanderOc

Con

Everything Pro just stated was a claim. None backed by support or evidence.

His arguments provide little more than entertainment value in this debate setting.
I look foreward to his ranting in the next round.
Debate Round No. 2
Aerogant

Pro

You can't call it a claim, when the entire society we live in reflects on the damages of machine-like living. Secondly, machine-like living is tied to damaged childhoods. Third, you can see that deep inside machine-liker livers, there is a very hurt child by the way they react to feelings and emotions. Therefore machine-like living is a weakness and a disease to the human brain which should be based on heart and mind, not machine.

You just don't understand because you're an idiot. Grow up, kid. Stop ruining everyone's discussions with your tiny knowledge pocket.
AlexanderOc

Con

Adding to his empty claims, now Pro goes on to attack me.
Amusing as it all is, these stories are not progressing his case any further. Nothing has been proven or logically shown to be true.
Debate Round No. 3
Aerogant

Pro

You're denying it all, that's why. You don't even understand 1% of how important and wise this message is. You're just condescending me because you're jealous of my passion and my dedication to putting an end to human stupidity.
AlexanderOc

Con

I would like to point one thing out while my opponent countinues to tout weightless claims (much like a politician).

Aerogant has lost an excessive number of debates.
He has continued, time and time again, to be scolded for being rude to debaters.
He has been voted down for misconduct in debates.

All the while, stating that everyone around him is not understanding enough, or too stupid to comprehend his pure genius.
Now, he must consider this, is he the only human being alive who is right?

Why is it that this systematic flow of debates is so incorrect? Are we all just too stupid to understand that debating is an internal, spiritual experience that should be cherished through deep discussion? Or is it that this one man, dislikes our way of doing things so he insists it is wrong, while his only support for that claimis that we're simply not ready to understand why.

Personally, I think our way of doing things is fine. Enjoyable even.
Seeing Aerogant will inevitably lose this debate for misconduct, I assume everyone agrees.
So, this systematic "robotic" way of debating is correct, because everyone who participates in it agrees it is. Aerogant's ideals are irrelevant to that truism.
Debate Round No. 4
Aerogant

Pro

There you go again proving that you're a complete idiot. Nobody - nobody loses this many debates.

Actually, no. People call me rude, but I can prove that they are just soft cowards and the term "idiot" is nothing like the term "retard". Go ahead and go through every response I've made on this site - not once did I use "retard", why? I am not "rude".

I am a genius. The amusing thing is, is means nothing to me, but everyone else get so worked up over it? Why? Because they doubt themselves.

Machine-like thinking is the product of regression. Humans start out with emotion, heart and mind, but if that is taken away, they become machine only. It's not a claim - it's how the world works.

You think everything is fine, while every single country in the history of mankind has fallen to very thing you practice and encourage with what exactly? Nothing. You have nothing. You are just too stupid to understand that you have no say in something you do not even understand in the first place. You cannot even recognize the damage it causes to everything. And lastly, wise men treat us the way they do because they do not want to see us go through their pain, as do I - I'm just more wicked than they are because I was raised by my subconscious throughout my childhood; forced to face my fears throughout the subconsciously projected monsters and environments filled with the smell of blood and darkness.

If this machine-shape debate is justified by how many agree, then you're just proving my point. Wise men don't need an army to get their points across - those who do are the cowards who have lost already, but refuse to face bit, so they rationalize and reassure themselves by getting other idiots to agree.
AlexanderOc

Con

Wise men don't lose debates to a guy who didn't even make an argument.
Debate Round No. 5
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
I never mentioned crying being weakness. As you said, it's a result. Not a choice. Can you choose to cry? Right now? Can you choose not to? Doubt it.

Again, what you're talking about is a willful reaction to the words of people.
If some man gets told by his friend that he is a terrible father, he will be offended. Why? Because the friend is attacking a value that the father holds dear. He does not say to himself " I think that I will be offended by your statement because that is the reasonable reaction"
It's automatic. The following actions of the father are what can be subjective. Violence, complaining, or the lack of action are the choice, not the emotion.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
Actually, crying is not a weakness - it's the result of letting go. When you commit yourself to what people say, that's the exact opposite of letting go.

So by my logic, the two positives are: Cry; Don't complain.
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
Using your logic, people should be able to decide not to cry. For they can simply choose to not be sad about anything that they encounter.

Seeing as people dislike being seen crying, and dislike being sad, it would make sense people would do so if they possesed that ability.
Since this is obviously not the case, crying, like being sad and offended, is a reaction, not a decision.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
What makes a statement derogatory? You. People can say anything to me - I won't budge until my life is threatened, because that's where I either fight for control or lose it all. You are offended by mere words in a world of wars, blood and tears. What does that show you? It shows you that you're weak and inconsiderate towards actual issues. So you rationalize your reactions - you have no right to be offended. You're only offended because you choose to take people's words more than what they are capable of doing. You inflict yourself.

You're in distress like a princess that keeps getting into situations beyond her power - they are beyond her power because she's weak and she gets into the situations because her weakness prevented her from becoming responsible.
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
Being offended is an emotion, a reaction to a deragatory statement.
It is impossible to eliminate an emotion.
Complaining is a manner of letting other know of your distress.
It is possible to not do this.

One cannot simply "decide" not to be offended. Just as one cannot decide to be sad.
However one can choose not to complain. Just as one can choose not to wallow in pity.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
There is no difference. Being offended is complaining. Otherwise, everyone is happy. Complaining is what causes contention between people. Being offended is what forces people to hold their true nature back - holding our true nature back turns us into monsters.

Being offended is the failure of one's self-control.

He who complains, is he who cannot abstain.

Those who do not complain, do not have concerns of their self-centered comfort zone. Those who do only complain and become offended because their feelings were hurt, which is an indication that you are emotionally weak, inconsiderate and selfish, I'm afraid.
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
There is a major difference from complaining and being offended. The former is not an emotion, but a reaction to an emotion. Were I to complain about being called stupid, then your point would be relevant.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
Being offended is not a positive human reaction. Complaining about what people say and do is like complaining about the heat of the sun - you can complain, but don't think you are stronger than those who don't mind the sun's heat or the heat of people's honesty.
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
You are above me because you are incapable of processing a human emotion? In that sense, all machines are above us. The exhibit no emotion to anything, so they must be the god on your hierarchy of entities.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
Nothing offends me, because I am above being offended.

Alex, why do you choose to be so low? It's not like I greased the pole.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Empiren 2 years ago
Empiren
AerogantAlexanderOcTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Why would you put 180 days on this...
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
AerogantAlexanderOcTied
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: pro made no arg. and attacked con.