The Instigator
brittcb4
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
michaeltang12
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

People are Born Evil

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
Con Tied Pro
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: 4/26/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,070 times Debate No: 16151
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (13)
Votes (2)

 

brittcb4

Con

People are not born evil.

1) I could argue the nature vs. nurture debate and that you can become evil, society corrupts you. With the DNA thing, should we consider mentally ill people evil (just a question of thought)?

2) I could argue that evolution is a factor. We humans are animals and we need to survive. Basic survival skills.

3) I could argue that we are born a blank slate as John Locke argued.

4) I could argue that evil is relative. It is subjective and societies define what it is. Your perceptions of what is evil is different than mine. If evil has changed over time, it is possible it can change again.
michaeltang12

Pro

I wish to thank my opponent for the opportunity to debate. It is a fun and amazing debate question.

I am the pros side, I will attempt to demonstrate why people are born evil.

First of all, definitions.

It seems to me that the 4.point you pointed is tautologically statement. You said that Your perceptions of what is evil is different than mine, so what is the definition of evil? I would like to further elaborate on your definitions and see if you approve.

Evil is the intention or effect of causing harm or destruction[citation needed], usually specifically from the perception of deliberately violating some moral code

Moral code is something concerned with principle of right and wrong behavior. Take murder as an example, if you kill a guy because of stealing his money, this of course regarded as a evil deeds.

A suitable response to
Mentation
Mankind behavior

We can't immediately measure the action of people after born ,so we can just see the general human being behavior as a whole.

I will leave the time to the opponent. Have fun !
Debate Round No. 1
brittcb4

Con

You said that it is difficult to measure if someone is evil after birth, which is why I think that you cannot say that people are born evil. I agree that people are evil according to your definition though. Societies each make up their own standards for what good and evil are. Good and evil, according to Hume, is nothing but an expression of benefit and harm from subjective views. What many see as "malice" or "evil", is actually a projection of the collective self-interest of social groups into an abstraction of absolute morality. If someone can commit an act for a reason, then the reason, (even if based on faulty or invalid information), is still a benefit from that person's perspective, or a benefit to others or a proposed collective or outside interest. Even doing evil for evil's sake, implies a "benefit" to the concept of evil, and is thus self-contradictory.
michaeltang12

Pro

michaeltang12 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
brittcb4

Con

brittcb4 forfeited this round.
michaeltang12

Pro

michaeltang12 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
brittcb4

Con

brittcb4 forfeited this round.
michaeltang12

Pro

michaeltang12 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
brittcb4

Con

brittcb4 forfeited this round.
michaeltang12

Pro

michaeltang12 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
Viewed 3,029 times.
Whoa.
Posted by larztheloser 6 years ago
larztheloser
Sorry for the slow reply ... I think all of your possible arguments can be reasoned well. Personally I would know how to do tabula rasa well, so I would run that. I don't necessarily suggest that for you, however. Just do what you feel most comfortable with.

In your place I would not be conceding so much to my opponent as well.
Posted by brittcb4 6 years ago
brittcb4
True, what better reasoned ones are there?
Posted by larztheloser 6 years ago
larztheloser
There are no "strongest" arguments. There are only better reasoned ones.
Posted by brittcb4 6 years ago
brittcb4
Possibly, I will consider it. I don't know what it is though haha..
Posted by Cobo 6 years ago
Cobo
If i tell you one will you debate with it?
Posted by brittcb4 6 years ago
brittcb4
Yes, I know they contradict each other, I want to know which argument is the strongest to use?
Posted by larztheloser 6 years ago
larztheloser
I think your four opening arguments contradict each other ie tabula rasa v evolution. I think relativity is a good point but not as you've stated it. The validity of any information can be based around how one excludes the alternative. Can the alternative to a moral law be ruled out? No. Therefore nothing has veritable moral content. Therefore one cannot say morals are universal, as they cannot logically be "laws." Therefore they must be relative.
Posted by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
To be clear, is it your intention that Pro has the burden of proof and has to show than an objective standard for evil exists and that people are born evil?
Posted by brittcb4 6 years ago
brittcb4
Yeah, I researched relativity and saw all the flaws it has. Although all theories do, but this did have many. However, I do believe it is subjective. What do you think are some of the strongest arguments that people are not born evil?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
brittcb4michaeltang12Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
brittcb4michaeltang12Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: FAIL DEBATE, as both sides dropped out... (checking the voting period debates, from Least To Most votes. By giving this one, it won't be prioritized in the system anymore.)