The Instigator
Max.Wallace
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
dsjpk5
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Political Science, the most evil science ther ever could be, using law like a flea, bloodsuckers

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
dsjpk5
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/14/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 466 times Debate No: 61712
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

Max.Wallace

Pro

Bring your big fat Weiner mouth Political Scientist, controlling the humanity to attend your masses, while you fly on high and live above, in your skyscraper and the jet you love.
Obama's trainers use the American dream, as their fuel for the PC machine, thate wishes to make all equal, except they that are better, thru self esteem, what a joke, Obama still tokes, smokes, and makes thos that also do pay more for the things they love, like what a bunch of hypocrisy. Snort your powder, those in power.
dsjpk5

Con

I am happy to accept this debate. I would like to point out that as
the instigator, and being the one who made the positive claim, my
opponent has the burden of proof. Since he has not offered any
evidence to support his claim yet, I will wait for my opponent to do so
before making my first argument.

I would also like to ask my opponent to keep a civil tone for the rest
of our debate.

Since he hasn't offered a definition of "political science", I will be
happy to do so. The definition of "political science" will be as
follows:

Political Science: is a social science discipline concerned with the
study of the state, nation, government, and politics and policies of
government. Aristotle defined it as the study of the state. [1]

Source:

1.http://en.m.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Max.Wallace

Pro

Have you the time to write a bible? That is what you suppose should be my BOP by comparing my words with that of Aristotle.

History is a long time ago, maybe we should look only at the present as our reference point. Understand? unlikely at best.
dsjpk5

Con

My opponent still hasn't offered any evidence to support his claim. I don't have to prove a negative. He now has one round left to make his case. I wish him luck.
Debate Round No. 2
Max.Wallace

Pro

The BOP should be yours, as you chose to disagree, but of course common sense is fleeting in debate rule land. You have proved nothing, only made statements, the BOP POS is on you.
dsjpk5

Con

Below, please find how your claim concerning me allegedly having the burden of proof to be incorrect.

"When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim. An argument from ignorance occurs when either a proposition is assumed to be true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is assumed to be false because it has not yet been proven true. This has the effect of shifting the burden of proof to the person criticizing the assertion, but is not valid reasoning."[2]

Now, despite the fact that my opponent has offered ZERO evidence to support his claims, I will not be so brash. I will offer what I believe to be a worse kind of science than political science... Eugenics.

"Adolf Hitler was a huge fan of eugenics and brought it to its natural conclusion: the Holocaust of World War II, where millions of the "genetically unfit" were exterminated in an effort to create a "master race." Those considered unfit were not just Jews, but also the criminal, weak, feeble-minded, insane and disabled (not to mention priests and nuns and those who helped try to hide the Jewish people)." [3]

Sources:

2.http://en.m.wikipedia.org...

3.http://www.ncregister.com...
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
The difference is rare. Your vote was a real shocker! In hindsight, it is the uber wealthy that are the best at political science, the ultimate politicos would never deign to be voted for, only to buy the politicains.
Posted by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
How does wearing an I "heart" t shirt make me or anyone a fool? This planet is not run by political scientists, its run by politicians. There's a difference. Poli Sci is the study of political ideology, understanding it in its context in the world at large. Being a politician is implementing an ideology and passing laws based on it. Most politicians are are not political scientists, most are lawyers.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Oh, I "heart"the planet!!11 says the politico, while they drop bombs.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
I don't wear I "heart"t shirt, so how much of a fool could I be? Maybe I should get a I "heart" debates shirt, then I will be a fool no more? Rational, is that what you consider this planet? It is run by political scientists is it not? You are totally incapable of answering those questions, genius.
Posted by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
"The BOP should be yours, as you chose to disagree" ha ha wow. You really have no idea what a debate is, or even a rational conversation. Why would anyone just agree with you because you said something? You must prove what you are saying is true, Max you've failed to show any evidence of your position while Con's definition shows that political scientists are not parasites. You're an absolute fool.
Posted by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
Lol Max you don't even know what political science is. You fancy yourself a poet yet lack a soul.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
c'mon, you jumped on this debate, don't be a quitter!!
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Uh, are you reading this debate? The title was the definition, absolutely.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Describe a civil tone, political scientist. Please! lol!!!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by FaustianJustice 2 years ago
FaustianJustice
Max.Wallacedsjpk5Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: There was no instigation.
Vote Placed by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
Max.Wallacedsjpk5Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: No contest, Max refused to debate.