The Instigator
Truth_seeker
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Con (against)
Winning
56 Points

Reason alone cannot make us live a moral life

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 8 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Judge Point System: Select Winner
Started: 9/6/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,544 times Debate No: 61337
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (16)
Votes (8)

 

Truth_seeker

Pro

I argue that reason alone cannot make us moral. Here are my terms:

Morals - Right and wrong can be defined by any society, beliefs, or religion of your choice.

Reason - Application of facts and logic to consciously make an informed decision

Reward - Arriving at the desired results by applying reason, physical, mental, or verbal action

Negative consequence - The opposite of a reward, only that regardless of whether or not the applications were made, the desired results were not achieved

Emotion - The state of experiencing happiness, sadness, anger, etc. distinctive from reason

Experience - process of undergoing something

Natural - The material world

Judges shall judge the debate strictly on the following criteria and explain why:

1) Strong definitions " If any ambiguity is found within each debators terms, count it against them

2) Arguments " The effectiveness of the arguments presented based on the premises and how well either side presents them with clarity (examples, thought experiments, analogies, etc.)

3) Counter-arguments " Their effectiveness in how well they defend their argument or/and weaken their opponent's argument

4) Logical fallacies " Pointing out logical fallacies in their opponent's arguments demonstrates how well the debators understand logic. If an opponent uses personal attacks, etc. That is counted against them. Judges must name a specific fallacy and quote con or pro's exact words in context.

5) Unaddressed points " If an opponent fails to respond to a point, you are to count that against them. If they agree, that boosts their opponent's side.

6) Burden of proof " Was the burden of proof fulfilled by either side? If not, count that against the debator(s)

Whoever uses the most qualitive/quantative arguments/counters and least fallacies wins. You are not here to simply vote, you are here to be a critical thinker. If you cannot follow the rules then it's probably best to not accept the judge nomination

First round acceptance
Debate Round No. 1
Truth_seeker

Pro

Truth_seeker forfeited this round.
Mikal

Con

not going to make an argument if pro refuses to debate. Will just take the FF as a concession and move on
Debate Round No. 2
Truth_seeker

Pro

Truth_seeker forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Truth_seeker

Pro

Truth_seeker forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Truth_seeker

Pro

Truth_seeker forfeited this round.
Mikal

Con

and concession
Debate Round No. 5
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by funnycn 3 years ago
funnycn
Mikal destroyed Pro...
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
I have this with raisor already lol
Posted by Ajabi 3 years ago
Ajabi
TS could actually have made a very powerful case here...mikal I can debate this with you, I promise I won't forfeit.
Posted by Bennett91 3 years ago
Bennett91
ha ha wow truth seeker quits at the sight of mikal.
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
argument and conduct , its basically a concession
Posted by numberwang 3 years ago
numberwang
can you give argument points in a ff if neither side posts arguments? or just conduct?
Posted by Ajabi 3 years ago
Ajabi
I came here thinking the debate would be over, and I should probably judge now...
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
If you are going to FF will you go ahead and just skip the debate along
Posted by ShadowKingStudios 3 years ago
ShadowKingStudios
I see many can only see one side of this tree. There is an argument one can present that would logically defend this debate's premise. You better hope you use it, Seeker.
Posted by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
I'm betting the amount of money represented by the amount of elo everyone has combined together on this site that Mikal will win this debate.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 3 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
Truth_seekerMikal
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Unfortunately, Pro forfeited the entire debate. Therefore, I award points and ultimately the win to Con.
Vote Placed by Secular_Mike 3 years ago
Secular_Mike
Truth_seekerMikal
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Zaradi 3 years ago
Zaradi
Truth_seekerMikal
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Well that was simple.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
Truth_seekerMikal
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Ajabi 3 years ago
Ajabi
Truth_seekerMikal
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Sargon 3 years ago
Sargon
Truth_seekerMikal
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by numberwang 3 years ago
numberwang
Truth_seekerMikal
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: concession, serious weaksauce m8s
Vote Placed by ShadowKingStudios 3 years ago
ShadowKingStudios
Truth_seekerMikal
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: FF