The Instigator
CarolHan
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points

Should kids play video games?

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 4 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/7/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 461 times Debate No: 45414
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

CarolHan

Con

Kids should not be able to play video games for their education and the environment.
Mikal

Pro

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
CarolHan

Con

Kids shouldn't play video games because if they do, their vision gets bad and they don't learn much from playing a silly old video game. When the parents let the children play video games, the children would take advantage and play video games all day long. Reading books is better.
Mikal

Pro

Some video games can help kids learn

Not all video games are bad. Some can actually benefit children and teach and help them to learn.

"Researchers who gathered in Boston for the American Psychological Association convention detailed a series of studies suggesting video games can be powerful learning tools -- from increasing younger students' problem-solving potential to improving the suturing skills of laparoscopic surgeons."[1]


[1] http://www.mackenty.org...
Debate Round No. 2
CarolHan

Con

To all of those who argue video game addiction is a made-up condition, new research presents evidence that may make you reconsider.

Rekindling the debate as to the existence of video game addiction is a recent study from researchers at Iowa State University and the National Institute on Media and the Family. The study, which is based on data from a nationwide survey of 1,178 American children and teenagers, aged 8 to 18, found that roughly one in 10 video game players (8.5 percent of American y
Mikal

Pro

There is nothing to refute from my adversary's argument. It had no meaning to the actual resolution. I believe he was making a case for video game addiction but did so poorly. 1/10 kids being addicted is actually a fair number, and much better than other things such as weed and what not.

The issue is that he would have to show video games are unhealthy. I have shown that they can promote and increase learning in children. Therefore the resolution is false

Vote pro.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by NarutoUzamaki 8 months ago
NarutoUzamaki
Con you are wrong
Posted by NotNeverNeutral 8 months ago
NotNeverNeutral
I have a younger brother who plays games such as "Age of Empires" and "Civilization" He is a big fan of history and Is extremely brilliant in school. While I agree that certain games will not necessarily be good for a child I would say that you have to account for games that DO have educational benefits (there are many). I dont think its as simple of a topic as "video games" as one entity.
Posted by liam13661 8 months ago
liam13661
the environment?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 8 months ago
Krazzy_Player
CarolHanMikalTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were sound and refuted Con's arguments and showed video games actually can benefit children in learning.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 8 months ago
johnlubba
CarolHanMikalTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Clear win for Pro, although I would have liked to see him refute the charge that playing video games can be bad for your eyes, nevertheless Con failed to counter Pro's source that video games can actually be helpful, I believe he made an attempt but ran our of characters, therefore didn't manage to complete his case. And after checking Pro's source I found it wasn't legit or in-fact broken, therefore Pro only managed to defend the resolution with a broken link, thus not affirming the resolution, thus arguments by default go to Con.
Vote Placed by Defro 8 months ago
Defro
CarolHanMikalTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro refuted Con's point in round 1, and Con did not counter Pro's refutation at all. Then Con made a statement that was not relevant to the subject at hand but could have been if Con were to explain WHY video game addiction was bad. Con also made a few minor grammatical errors.
Vote Placed by donald.keller 8 months ago
donald.keller
CarolHanMikalTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct was good. Pro used sources, as opposed to Con. Con's spelling was poor. Pro kept to the resolution, and his arguments went refuted, while Con dropped his argument for one that didn't match the Resolution.