The Instigator
bsergent
Pro (for)
Losing
18 Points
The Contender
artC
Con (against)
Winning
66 Points

Personal pictures as avatars should be disallowed on debate.org.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/27/2007 Category: Technology
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 6,270 times Debate No: 1075
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (123)
Votes (28)

 

bsergent

Pro

If this site is about ideas, then there is no need for faces.

What a person looks like has absolutely no bearing on the validity of a point so why introduce that data?

Personal photos could easily be faked.

They pose a distraction.
They encourage prejudice and stereotyping.
They reduce personal security.
They serve no relevant purpose.
They encourage classism.
They encourage sexism.
artC

Con

Personal pictures should not be disallowed on debate.org because they do not present any problem as far as a debate is concerned.

Debate.org is a website in which people are encouraged to debate one another in a mature and effective manor. If the idea of a picture being distracting, encouraging stereotyping, and serving no purpose is an argument for disallowing pictures, than why should other aspects such as age remain? Or whether one is a male or female? These encourage classism as well.

It is true that photos can easily be fake, but so can everything else in your profile.
Debate Round No. 1
bsergent

Pro

First of all thank you for joining in this debate.

Secondly, I'm not trying to insult you personally, I'm merely attacking ideas, actions, and trends. While they may be ideas you hold, actions you take, and trends you support (or not), I'm saying here and now saying once and for all that I don't know you and assume the best as a matter of personal choice.

You will never see my attack a person unless I know them IRL, if it appears that way, I assure you and everyone else that it was not my intention.

The English language is weak, and I will not further cloud my expression with continuous sycophantic qualification beyond this one.

I am not debating you per se, I'm actually debating a policy. I said that to make it clear I don't expect or plan to attempt to convince you personally, as thats impossible people convince themselves, never are they swayed form outside. At best the outside forvides evidence when the person will then accept or reject, in either case its a deeply personal decsion and cannot be forced, even by fact.

I am merely going to express my position for the record.

Now, with the equivalent of the terms of service out of the way. on to the debate! :)

---

"Personal pictures should not be disallowed on debate.org because they do not present any problem as far as a debate is concerned."

Even if that were true, the absence of a negative does not imply a positive. Just because it doesn't hurt anything means it's good.

"Debate.org is a website in which people are encouraged to debate one another in a mature and effective manor. If the idea of a picture being distracting, encouraging stereotyping, and serving no purpose is an argument for disallowing pictures, than why should other aspects such as age remain? Or whether one is a male or female? These encourage classism as well."

Bravo! I'm deeply impressed you see that, even if you are being sarcastic. That's actually something I've written about. (Underlore.com if you or whoever would like to read some of it.) I've argued precisely that point, that if gender and race are supposed to be non-factors, then why ask for them on every form?

I would indeed have them stripped as well, but the likely hood of that is far slimmer than simply removing personal pictures. I may be insanely optimistic to hope for either one, but as cynical as I am, I'm also deep down an optimist.

May I suggest looking over the comments of this and the other debates you and I've participated in for arguments in your next post? I would like to cover some things mentioned in them, but I don't want to put words in your mouth, also I'm sure your cadre of supporters would love the opportunity to come to your aid.

Perhaps after this we should have a separate debate on the removal of gender and race from all forms. I'd even like single person unisex bathrooms like on airplanes, or in private residences.

Again thank you for your time.
artC

Con

I'd first like to say I appreciate the comments about not attacking me personaly and I would love to believe that; however you've contradicted that statement in the comments section of another debate. I will give you the benefit of the doubt in an actual debate forum however.

"Even if that were true, the absence of a negative does not imply a positive. Just because it doesn't hurt anything means it's good."

That is true, however I'm not arguing for a positive, I am simply disputing your negative. I'm not here to prove photos on this website are beneficial, I am disproving that they are harmful.

I was not being sarcastic. You can not debate for the removal of one aspect of a website if it poses the same discrimination as another aspect which you are not including in the removal. Actually you can because you are but it is ineffective.

You have stated that I should remove my picture and replace it with one that means something to me. You have also voiced great displeasure for my smile, claiming that it is some sort of ad and that it feeds into society which often times demeans women.

I have already challenged your first claim with the argument that I took a simple picture of my face the way that it looks most of the time and that I don't have to show anyone what is important to me or what my accomplishments are. I am here to vioce my opinions on matters I find important and interesting and those opinions are what should speak for me.

You may argue that my face is what is speaking for me. Since this a picture of my face, smiling, and not a picture of me in a skimpy halloween costume or a swim suite or even one that shows any part of my body, I'll ask the readers of this debate to conclude it is appropriate to be posted and to represent me fairly, without prejudice.
Debate Round No. 2
bsergent

Pro

"However you've contradicted that statement in the comments section of another debate."

Not really. You and others seem to equate disapproval with an attack. This is a particular frightening symptom of our dominance culture. IE we've been trained that "respect" (Connor) and the like equal forms of submission. Assertion is not an insult. If I have to be rude to be honest, then manners are the problem, not my statement of my perception of reality.

"I am simply disputing your negative."

Ahhh. Fair enough.

"Actually you can because you are but it is ineffective."

You're right, but so is arguing for a massive change. Frankly I'm unaware of an effective way to change things in general, except to point out hidden advantages and disadvantages and hope greed does the hard work for me.

"You have stated..."

Yes I have.

"I have already challenged your first claim with the argument that I took a simple picture of my face the way that it looks most of the time."

And I refute that. Beyond the obvious nature of a still photograph not being an animated human face, there are impressions given by a photo that can wholly disagree with the person pictured.

Here's where things are going to get complicated.

The smile is popular because it's an evolution of a chimp shown of submission, baring the teeth to indicate non-threat. There is a lot of that still in a smile. A woman's smile is a symbol of a pleased woman (I know how that sounds, bear with me here, I have a point). A pleased woman is a symbol for a pliable or grateful woman, and that easily parlays into a sexual favor. Think of the infamous smile across a crowded room to see what I mean. Now obviously not all smiles mean that, not even the majority or even close in fact, but every smile in print or television advertising media does, to one extent or another, when it's staged and on the face a pretty actress or other representative. The message of every commercial is you're not good enough buy this. Good enough to what you ask? Meet you goals. And for a commercial to be effective is has to aim wide, has to be vague. So the goal, is usually sex, either getting it or keeping it or upgrading it. Sexual tension is the primary mechanism of control for government, business, and religion. (hmmm that's probably a good debate topic, but he'd have to remove character limits, I could do a thesis on that one.)

So, a staged smile usually says. "Do what I'm asking and you'll get sexual pleasure." When it's with a product in hand the model becomes divorced from the sale. It's customer paying seller for sex from third party, (Guy buys Ferrari get laid at club.) But, since this mechanism is so pervasive, we start to think that's how people really are. Time for a great movie quote to illustrate my point!

"We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true. But you people sit there day after day, night after night, all ages, colors, creeds. We're all you know. You're beginning to believe the illusions we're spinning here. You're beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube. You eat like the tube. You raise your children like the tube. You even think like the tube. This is mass madness -- you maniacs! In God's name you people are the real thing, WE are the illusion." -- Howard Beale, as played by Peter Finch, during his live studio broadcast of the Network News Hour_ Network 1976

So girls start wearing these smiles, not realize that when they do it, because they are not on tv, and they are not selling something (usually) *they become the product.* Are you starting to see the problems this could cause? Now, women are allowed to sell themselves directly in all ways but one, sexually. So naturally, thanks to the forbidden fruit angle, scarcity, and a trillion dollar advertising push(to make sex super desirable, and complex to get, requiring mass sustained purchase). Sex is the first thing everyone thinks of, but of course if they frankly admit it they are perverts. Why? Because frankness short circuits the power feed. It gives women the power directly, rather than third parties.

Why should I pay Kay diamonds to sleep with a girl when I could pay her directly? )This was originally the point of jewelry, gold and jewels WERE money in an era when women couldn't own property beyond what they wore. Now with the diamond resale market being annihilated, thanks to hording by diamond cartels and over mining and the abandonment of the gold standard, etc. that fall-back is gone, women are once again unable to own anything without direct government and business say so.

So again I ask why can't I just pay the girl directly? Because government, business and church want a piece of that. Government says it's a crime, religion says it's a sin, and business (via their mouth, TV) says it's humiliating. When in fact it's none of these things.

A date is a sidestep of this absurd puritanical prohibition, instead of giving the girl the money to spend, in the hopes of having a relationship with her (funny that relations is a term for sex), you spend it as per her instruction. In the past women didn't work, and had no bills, thanks to male dominance, so when they had money all the did with it was leisure, this is why traditional date activities are dinner and a movie etc.

And here's where you come in. Your smile is also staged. Even if it was genuine at the time you choose to showcase it. And I believe you made this choice on a subconscious and perhaps even conscious level now that I've made you aware of it, for the same reasons they use pretty girls to sell everything under the sun. Power through sexual tension.

This gets really complicated, and it can't be simplified. It's hard to imagine butter sales being linked with witch burning by monogamy, but they are.

"I don't have to show anyone what is important to me"

Is that how you operate? You only do what you have to? :( That honestly makes me sad, just the idea of it. It makes me think of the smile as submission, makes me think of objectified women, makes me think of you doing what you are told without even realizing it, and makes me think of your lost career as a cancer researcher.

I'm honestly trying to help you and all those of your caste to free themselves and thus the rest of us.

Seriously, are you ok with being lusted after being the real and dominate source for an esteem you receive online? If I were handsome, and even the chance of my face getting in the way of an honest appraisal of what people thought of me and my words, I'd hide my face in a flash.

And all this is but one example of one's face being a serious distraction and attack on their ideas and individuality. There are several others. So I still say, just like race and gender, if they don't matter don't put them in the form.

Hence my opinion that the option shouldn't be built in.
artC

Con

Okay, half of your argument is all things I agree with. But it's a little difficult for me to believe you believe all that as an absolute. You have claimed to be a genius which I admire, the fact that you said it, not so much that you are, or may be. (I don't know) So how can you speak in such absolutes? You do strike me as an incredibly intelligent person who is able to think outside of social norms and to think fairly scientifically.

The world, and the ideas that you're describing aren't as cut and dry as you've presented them. The majority of your argument was a pretty comprehensive look at the marketing industry but not much more. Can you honestly say the reason everyone(or women) smile for the purpose of selling oneself?

Are you denying all evidence that a smile means so much more. That it is used by professionals as a means of not only getting what they want, may it be sex, or a job, but also to make your fellow man feel at ease and seem friendly?

I actually make it a point to smile at everyone, maybe it's because I have always worked around the elderly. It makes people feel good when someone smiles at them. Don't expect me to believe that all smiles are for the purpose of advertisemnet or submission.

On that note, my other job is that of a server, where I constantly smile to sell both food and drinks, and myself, in order to get better tips. These are two different smiles completelty.

"And here's where you come in. Your smile is also staged."

Yes it is by definition staged.

"Even if it was genuine at the time you choose to showcase it. And I believe you made this choice on a subconscious and perhaps even conscious level now that I've made you aware of it, for the same reasons they use pretty girls to sell everything under the sun. Power through sexual tension."

My intent was never to sell myself or gain any sort of power through sexual tension, though I agree this idea is well founded in other smiles or with ads.

"Is that how you operate? You only do what you have to? :( "

No, it is not how I operate. Poor choice of words. Let's just say I don't feel the need to prove anything, for I know what I am and what I've accomplished and I feel, just as in real life, people who get to know me will learn these things.

Because of what I know about your views of humanity, I wont take what you said as an insult and thank you for your concern, but I really don't need it. Trust me. I think very highly of myself in terms of achievement and integrity and I am not in any way submissive.(At least not anymoer than you or anyone else.)

"I'm honestly trying to help you and all those of your caste to free themselves and thus the rest of us."

Thanks, that's very noble, but not thanks. If you knew me and then felt like you needed to help I would welcome it. But you are making assumptions about me which I don't much appreciate.

I feel completely right in showing my face for it is a part of me just like anything else. Appearance has a bad rep because of how people react to it, not because of what it is. So am I really the one feeding into cultural downfalls by showing my picture? Or are you by asking me to remove it?

The internet strives to be like the real world in almost every way. If you are presented with someones face when speaking with them, then why not when communicating online?
Debate Round No. 3
bsergent

Pro

"But it's a little difficult for me to believe you believe all that as an absolute."

Every rule has an exception, except this one. *head explodes*

We live in a paradoxical dynamic universe so no, no absolutes. I am absolutely a moral relativist. *smirk*

"…is able to think outside of social norms and to think fairly scientifically."

I try so very hard. We as a species seem trapped by our habits, not just of action and thought but of perception, and there are forces in play that would very much like to keep us this way. I am not of them. Or at least I strongly dislike the idea of being one of them.

"The world, and the ideas that you're describing aren't as cut and dry as you've presented them."

I grant that, my intention was to provide an overview. The data is very much interconnected and every statement I've made needs qualifiers and further definition, and those qualifiers and definitions in turn would need the same until I'd have to include ALL DATA. (caps because I can't bold or italicize)

"Can you honestly say the reason everyone(or women) smile for the purpose of selling oneself?"

No, they aren't doing it intentionally in most settings, it's a kind of habit. Smiling is as natural as applause. Make of that what you will. It is one of those blends of instinct and social training. What I said was that all staged smiles are a sale effort, from the used car guy, to the realtor lady.

"…make your fellow man feel at ease and seem friendly?"

In person is does these things, but when its staged, and then showcased, it becomes different. If a photo makes you feel at ease you are being tricked, your brain does not realize it's just a photo. Mine does, photos don't do anything for me except convey data. (This is not to say I can't be tricked in this way, for example I love my dwarf hamster Gustov as if he were a tiny human, because he's small, like a child, furry, like we once were, and has huge eyes, also like a child.)

"I actually make it a point to smile at everyone, maybe it's because I have always worked around the elderly."

I smile at people as much as I can but for the reason smiling was intended, to convey that I'm not a threat, which I find radically changes things. I'm 6'5, bald and look like I'm frowning all the time, if I relax people they are happier. You do not need to smile to convey your non threatening status. But again in any case a smile in person is a totally different thing then a staged smile. I worked in a rest/care facility, and visit one every Thursday health permitting. The woman I visit, her roommate and the other I've gotten to know after having left the job have taught me that honest conversation and time spent is more valuable than any fake smile. (not to say that yours are fake, but some peoples' are.

"My intent was never to sell myself…"

And as before in the other comment ‘debate', I'm not disputing what you intended originally, I'm talking about what is being done every time you consider the concept of changing your photo and turn the idea down for reasons other than laziness.

"Let's just say I don't feel the need to prove anything…"

Whew! Good. Really, that would have sucked.

"…people who get to know me will learn these things…" "…"I really don't need it. Trust me. I think very highly of myself in terms of achievement and integrity…"

Then is it really so wrong of me to ask that those of you blessed with good looks AND character showcase the latter instead of the former?

"…and I am not in any way submissive."

I hope that wasn't knee jerk, based on an assumption of submission being bad. For the record, I find honestly submissive people extremely respectable since the desire for control is the product of fear, they by definition are very brave. Further, submission to a grand idea can yield truly astonishing people. Gandhi and Einstein being quick examples. Submission goes hand in hand with compassion, you will not see me speak ill of it, my only beef is with the illusion of submission for power. Or ‘topping from the bottom' as they say in the lifestyle.

"But you are making assumptions about me which I don't much appreciate."

Then correct them if they are pertinent and are my business. My assumptions are mostly based on evidence, I would love to say all, but I'm human and thus I'm sure have prejudices.

"Appearance has a bad rep because of how people react to it, not because of what it is."

The same could be said of all words and much art. But yet we place limits on the expressions because of the reactions. While I wish we lived in a world where that argument was practical, we don't, therefore the responsibility is yours, just as its yours not to scream fire when there is none.

"So am I really the one feeding into cultural downfalls by showing my picture?"

When you know the reaction, yes. So now you get a choice, openly admit that you're a part of the system I'm attacking which objectifies women among countless other horrors, or admit to previous ignorance and find a more candid photo of yourself or something meaningful to you. That may be a false dichotomy but I really personally can see no third option, feel free to point one out.

"The internet strives to be like the real world in almost every way. If you are presented with someone's face when speaking with them, then why not when communicating online?"

That would be grand, but that's more webcam then photo, and still someone of a technological hurdle.

For the record I'm partially satisfied you're not exploiting people intentionally, but the fact remains that you are exploiting them none the less. There will always be people who give you a little more attention, a little more courtesy, a little more leeway, than you would otherwise strictly deserve, and I refuse to believe that you're refusing to give that up out of ignorance.

In fact we are both spoiled. Beyond the fact that we are rich Americans compared to the rest of the planet's population. My brain has always made things easy for me, I've never studied and I was on the academic team and have a 3.1, I don't have to read manuals, or assembly instructions. Ideas fit seamlessly together for me. I did not earn this, I was born with it, and I do accentuate, build on it, and showcase it. I think your beauty has had a similar easing effect on your life, and you engage in the same sorts of activities related to it.

The difference is, I'm aware of what I am and what I have, and I'm not willfully exploiting anyone, if I possibly have another option. Can you truly say the same?

P.S. I'm very pleased with this debate so far.
artC

Con

"When you know the reaction, yes. So now you get a choice, openly admit that you're a part of the system I'm attacking which objectifies women among countless other horrors, or admit to previous ignorance and find a more candid photo of yourself or something meaningful to you. That may be a false dichotomy but I really personally can see no third option, feel free to point one out."

I wont admit that I contribute to the objectification of women; I simply don't believe that's true. As far as ignorance is concerned, I can only admit to being ignorant of the stir one photo would cause. I have always been aware, as every women is, how men sometimes react to women, however, I think if you posed the question of whether a smiling face has such an impact that someones vote may be swayed or that it objectifies anything, I think the majority would say no.

If we go by your argument that something should be removed because of the way someone may react then let us consider this.

While you have stated that you don't find yourself attractive, some may. It's not a far stretch to say that some women would find you handsome and attractive. I'm sure you have considered this. Why then do you have a picture of yourself up? Does that not compromise the integrity of your contribution here? Maybe not on as grand a scale as you say mine does, but still.

"There will always be people who give you a little more attention, a little more courtesy, a little more leeway, than you would otherwise strictly deserve, and I refuse to believe that you're refusing to give that up out of ignorance."

According to the scenario above, there will always be those who give you the same treatment. Yet you are not smiling, nor are you an attractive woman.

It's more out of defiance, not ignorance. I refuse to compromise what I want to do and I think is fair to do, because there are people who exploit women, or give preferential treatment to attractive women.

I think that comment about my beauty/your mind is funny. I'm not past that point of beauty where things get handed to me or become easier for me than anyone else. If anything, my mind is what makes things easier for me. We are both spoiled, you more so than I am however. Since I used to be part of the rest of the world you compared this country with.

"The difference is, I'm aware of what I am and what I have, and I'm not willfully exploiting anyone, if I possibly have another option. Can you truly say the same?"

Yes.

You are exploiting everyone you debate with when you present arguments they may not understand, as in, lack the mental capacity to understand. You do not have to do this, just as I do not have to show my picture but choose to. Have you ever read "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut? I can't stop thinking about it while writing this.

About submission, there is a reason I wrote, "not more so than you or anyone else". That was a bit of clarification without going to much into detail.
Debate Round No. 4
bsergent

Pro

"I'm sure you have considered this."

Not seriously no.

"Why then do you have a picture of yourself up? Does that not compromise the integrity of your contribution here?"

No, as I explained in the comment debate from your other debate. I posted my picture to make clear my identity, as it accompanies my real name. And it is meant to convey boredom, as is my primary emotion. No one is going to vote for me based on how pretty i am and how ad they want to sleep with someone that looks like me. Further my picture does not contribute even slightly to the objectification of my gender.

"According to the scenario above, there will always be those who give you the same treatment."

The number of people willing to do so because of my face is so vanishingly small, they may be safely disregarded. Your face however as explained before has a trillion dollar advertising push behind it.

"It's more out of defiance, not ignorance. I refuse to compromise what I want to do and I think is fair to do, because there are people who exploit women, or give preferential treatment to attractive women."

Thats the best argument you've made, but I still think you're making an ethicall unsound decsion. But of course my goal was never to convince you, merely to make others think. And i've accomplished that.

"I'm not past that point of beauty where things get handed to me or become easier for me than anyone else."

How do you know? Spend much time in public looking like i do?

"We are both spoiled, you more so than I am however. "

Thats a whole other debate, and you just don't know. Its irrelevant anyway but i just have to say you're wrong. I cant pout my way or flirt my way into anything. And regardless of you taking the option or not, you have it. In fact you could take your clothes off and make more than a doctor. So don't tell me *i'm* more spoiled.

"Have you ever read "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut?"

Indeed i have and seen the movie, I hate the value placed on beauty in the book. Beauty will not cure cancer, beauty will not get us off this planet unless aliens find us sexy, beauty will not solve any meaningful problem.

"About submission, there is a reason I wrote, "not more so than you or anyone else". That was a bit of clarification without going to much into detail."

Fair enough. Thats pleasing.

Happy new year guys and gals i wish we could spend this energy cooperating. *sigh*
artC

Con

"No, as I explained in the comment debate from your other debate. I posted my picture to make clear my identity, as it accompanies my real name. And it is meant to convey boredom, as is my primary emotion. No one is going to vote for me based on how pretty i am and how ad they want to sleep with someone that looks like me. Further my picture does not contribute even slightly to the objectification of my gender."

Have you considered that my picture is to more fully make clear my identity? Smiling conveys my primary emotion. Given, it is entirely more complex than boredom and can not be summed up in one word.

"The number of people willing to do so because of my face is so vanishingly small, they may be safely disregarded. Your face however as explained before has a trillion dollar advertising push behind it."

You are presuming a hell of a lot here. There is not a way for you to know how may people online find you attractive, just as there is no way for you to know how many find me attractive. Furthermore, it is even more unlikely that you knw how many people's votes are swayed by the appearance of either of us.

"How do you know? Spend much time in public looking like i do?"

Spend any time in public looing like I do??

"We are both spoiled, you more so than I am however. "

"In fact you could take your clothes off and make more than a doctor. So don't tell me *i'm* more spoiled."

So now I'm spoiled because I have the option to make money while taking my clothes off? I would say you're spoiled because that option is not available to you, hence people wont ever treat you like it is to win a debate.

"Indeed i have and seen the movie, I hate the value placed on beauty in the book. Beauty will not cure cancer, beauty will not get us off this planet unless aliens find us sexy, beauty will not solve any meaningful problem."

I think you missed the point of the story.

It's too bad I didn't make you realize your own handicap in the stance you hold, but at least I can honestly say you haven't convinced me either.
Debate Round No. 5
123 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by JesusAaronChristPayne 4 years ago
JesusAaronChristPayne
Pictures and real Names should be required to log on to the internet period so that people doing evil deeds can be held accountable for their actions. Hiding behind an avatar and false names removes accountability for one's actions. We are already so disconnected from society and need to attempt to avoid being treated like and empty avatars by others.
Posted by bsergent 8 years ago
bsergent
And we STILL have princes charming in heat rushing to defend princess plastic.

Amazing.

Read here for another of your kind.

Do you seriously think she'll reward your for your "bravery"?

http://innomen.blogspot.com...
Posted by RUNE_SCIMMY 8 years ago
RUNE_SCIMMY
i think CON is right i mean what harm can having a picture of yourself on this site do??? oh no i think i will die if i see PRO'S real face so maybe i should have voted for him so i won't have to see it
Posted by JackBauerPower 9 years ago
JackBauerPower
Ha brian, still incapable of putting two and two together. Considering that you like to follow all of her debates one would think that you would have been able to figure it out by now. But alas, you still haven't come close.
Posted by bsergent 9 years ago
bsergent
"…that you act as if you are a revolutionary…"

You haven't read all my work, all you know of my mind is this tiny little debate. I Am a revolutionary, and again, I'll let history be the judge. You keep trying to convince me that I should be ashamed of my opinion of myself and that speaking it openly and honestly is somehow rude, but it isn't. I do not share your slave mentality, I do not think that just because the components of my thoughts are prior art that the summation of them must therefore be worthless. Your Logic Is Flawed.

"The difference is what you do with them."

Exactly! And time will tell if I am wasting them or not.

"…I would assume the tone…"

And that would be your loss, not mine.

"Nobody likes being told what they think by someone else."

Are you kidding? People pay hundreds an hour to be told what they really think. It's called psychotherapy. People all think they are an expert on the mind just because they have one but that is not the case.

http://youtube.com...

You simply don't understand, and you're angry with me for announcing that I do without apologizing for it. Well I earned it with countless hours of study and the accompanying alienation. My knowledge had a steep price, and you're lucky I feel the way I do about the sale of data or else I wouldn't give it away. I'm not forcing you or anyone else to take from my buffet, if you don't like the crab cakes, leave them alone, because the chef does not care.

I simply could not care less for your definition of ‘offensive'.
Posted by bsergent 9 years ago
bsergent
"If I can go through life and have profound thoughts and care about human kind and still not act like you, it baffles me why you can't."

Because I'm not content to merely have the thoughts and feel the caring I have to DO something with it. Something that matters.

"It seems you don't want to be cordial and accept some of the norms of society."

You assume that my mode of speaking to you is my mode of speaking to everyone. You have a twisted definition of manners. I'm actually quite considerate and kind by default. You as I've explained before confuse respect with servility. I do not have to agree with you in order to be polite. You call every disagreement an insult. Well you're wrong to me, and I'm going to share it if it's pertinent to the conversation, which it is in a debate. Respect is not kissing your hind side no matter how pretty it is, and that is the core point here, your whole caste is spoiled.

"It's not perfect but it's just not as faulty as you would have us believe."

And the result is stagnation. You want to live in social stasis and that's unacceptable because if you hold still while everything else changes you becomes decay.

"I do not separate the person from their ideas because they are not to be separated."

So you reject everything Lincoln ever said because he was in practice a racist? You're just being absurd.

"You are set on changing people and their ideas…"

How many times to I have to explain that I am not trying to convince anyone of anything? I'm simply providing an option for future generations. To think that you even CAN convince people of anything is absurd in the extreme. At most you can make them aware of an opinion they already held, or remind them of what they already thought by application of previous ideas. (if A then B)
Posted by BrianFranklin 9 years ago
BrianFranklin
Kels, now you see who Jack is! All he does is backing up ArtC...ArtC, why don't you be yourself? You are Jack and Jack is you.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
What I meant by nothing better to do was your offensive rants, not an attempt to spread what you hold to be true. Although it seems to you they are one in the same.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
Lastly, it is impossibly irritating that you act as if you are a revolutionary, holding ideas no one else holds. I have met hundreds of people who say what you are saying, just not as eloquently. This is what annoys me. I am not unique. The ideas I have now have been thought of by many people before me. You are not unique, the thoughts you have, others have had before. The difference is what you do with them. You are wasting them. I have not read your book, but judging from the tone you use to talk to people, I would assume the tone in the book is similar.

Nobody likes being told what they think by someone else. if you plan to achieve anything stop being such a jerk, for lack of a better word.
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
The reason I can dislike you for what you're saying and how you're saying it is because I have similar ideas, and ideas you have yet to or will never think of.

I am not considered to be a conventional person yet I don't have this pompous air about me. If I can go through life and have profound thoughts and care about human kind and still not act like you, it baffles me why you can't. You choose not to but not for the reason of being incapable of it. You don't want to change. It seems you don't want to be cordial and accept some of the norms of society.

It doesn't make sense to live in a world where every social norm is wrong. They exist for a reason. What I dislike most is how yous speak about what we as humans have created for ourselves, the way that we've reached order. It's not perfect but it's just not as faulty as you would have us believe.

I do not separate the person from their ideas because they are not to be separated. Just like a person is not separated from their actions. To suggest that I should think one thing of you and another of your thoughts is absurd.

Don't blame me of doing nothing to better conditions for anyone other than myself. It's not true, I just do it in less offensive way, most of the time.

I will be more effective in spreading my ideas to others than you probably ever will. You are set on changing people and their ideas yet you billittle them, tell them what they think, and then are confused why they don't accept you. At least when I share my ideas I do it in a receptive way. It doesn't matter that that is what you're trying to change. You even said you can't start driving on the other side of the road until everyone else does. If that's true and you believe it you would talk to people in a way they would appreciate more even if it is what you are trying to stop, and then when you have them listenig to you, that is the time to present difficult ideas that require thoughts outside of the norm.
28 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by RUNE_SCIMMY 8 years ago
RUNE_SCIMMY
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by whitesoxfan450 8 years ago
whitesoxfan450
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 8 years ago
blond_guy
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by TonyX311 9 years ago
TonyX311
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by mrmazoo 9 years ago
mrmazoo
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Vikuta 9 years ago
Vikuta
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
bsergentartCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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