The Instigator
TriciaCashings
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Conspiracy_Theory
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Resolved: Individuals have a moral obligation to assist people in need.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/1/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,252 times Debate No: 19081
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

TriciaCashings

Con

Most individual perform actions off of consequences whether or not the consequences are good or bad. Acting off of belief would be martyrdom. Martyrdom is suffering or bearing hardship for sake of a personal cause, religion or belief. Acting off of consequence would be someone wanting to do something bad or even good and that person then think of consequences of this said action and whether they like the consequences or not they will choose not to or to continue the action. If someone feels or believes that they didn't have a moral obligation to assist people in need then nothing will stop them. As bad consequences can influence an individual, good consequences can also. An individual can easily bribe another individual to not assist someone in need, with this bribe comes the obligation to not assist, and now this second individual morals has also changed. There will be no consequence for not assisting people in need according to the second individual, thus comes to the conclusion of this person not assisting people in need.
Conspiracy_Theory

Pro

Looking forward to the debate. I'll give you my position since you gave me yours in R1. Good luck.

Con:

"There will be no consequence for not assisting people in need according to the second individual, thus comes to the conclusion of this person not assisting people in need."

Pro:

Failing to assist people in need does not result immediate or serious consequence, but the effect of your actions is inflicted upon them.

Debate Round No. 1
TriciaCashings

Con

TriciaCashings forfeited this round.
Conspiracy_Theory

Pro

Conspiracy_Theory forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
TriciaCashings

Con

TriciaCashings forfeited this round.
Conspiracy_Theory

Pro

It seems as if we both missed arguments. Voters may do as they wish.

Vote Pro :3
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by TriciaCashings 5 years ago
TriciaCashings
do why did they write there argument on the comments and then wrote pro and con on the rounds...and yeah i am LD in Debate and it crazy cause i gotta write both sides to cases
Posted by Conspiracy_Theory 5 years ago
Conspiracy_Theory
Mr.wigggles, please don't write out your beliefs before the debate has concluded. Thank you.
Posted by Mr.wigggles 5 years ago
Mr.wigggles
\My criterion for this debate will be that of self- interest of ones own happiness and Ethical egoism which is defined as-is the prescriptive doctrine that all persons ought to act from their own self-interest. By http://philosophy.lander.edu.... This states that in acting for ones self-interest is provides one happiness. We do not need to assist others, but only assist ourselves reach happiness. We do not have to be forced or have a duty to serve those in need because we are not obligated to help others but our selves. This does not mean that people CAN'T assist or help those in need, but that they are not required or enslaved to do so. Only by free-will and choice can they if one want to.
My Contention will be that of a capitalistic economy in which people work to achieve their own goals and happiness. This is the opposite of socialism, or communism in which everything is shared equally between one another. People that work, are rewarded, those that don't do not get rewarded. People are not responsible and have to help those in need, but those that do have the power to help, can if they desire.
According to ayn rand and her theory on Objectivism, and Ethical Egoism that individuals help themselves for their own self-interest for their own happiness. That people are not obligated to be enslaved into assist those in need. These belief are why I urge you to agree with my negative opinion of the resolved that Individuals do not have the moral obligation to assist those in need.
Posted by Mr.wigggles 5 years ago
Mr.wigggles
Individuals do not have a moral obligation to assist people in need.
No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as "the right to enslave."
-- Ayn Rand, "Man's Rights," The Virtue of Selfishness
I agree with Ayn Rand that individuals should not be imposed to obligated or responsible to serve another man unchoosenly, and in a sense acan be considered a form of enslavement. Individuals do not have a duty to assist and serve others, and nor those in need. That is why I negate the resolved that "individuals have a moral obligation to assist those in need." I believe that "individuals do NOT have a moral obligation to assist those in need.
I will give my interpretation of the resolved to understand my stance as the negative, by first defining key terms in the statement. . According to Merriam- Websters dictionary, obligation is defined as something one is bound to do : DUTY, RESPONSIBILITY . moral as conforming to a standard of right behavior, assist as to give usually supplementary support or aid to, to give support or aid. Assist according to Merriam Webster as to give aid or help., Service is a synonym of assist and is defined as an act of helpful activity; help; aid: to do someone a service.
My highest moral value for this debate will be that of Objectivism (Ayn Rand)
"Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life."
Ayn rand's philosophy of Objectivism states that every man works for himself, and serves for only his own happiness and not for the happiness of others. To pursue his own self interest and for not the self interest of others.
My criterion for this debate will be that of self- interest of ones own hap
Posted by Brooklyn1223 5 years ago
Brooklyn1223
bleh i dont like this topic in LD lol
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
i was in a debate like htis one, i was a pro but found out i was kinda a mix
Posted by Conspiracy_Theory 5 years ago
Conspiracy_Theory
You should be a little more specific: The poor? Health issues? Psychological problems?
No votes have been placed for this debate.