The Instigator
River101
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
EAT_IT_SUKA
Con (against)
Winning
2 Points

Should we Switch to Electronic Books?

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...
EAT_IT_SUKA
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 676 times Debate No: 71789
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

River101

Pro

Electronic books are way more complex then the normal paperback. Also paper gets worn and used after a certain amount of time.
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

I accept this debate with PRO. I will be debating for CON, and my thesis will be: We shouldn't switch to electronic books.
PRO hasn't clarified who 'we' is in the question 'Should we switch to electronic books?', so I will ask him/her to tell us who 'we' is.
Since PRO hasn't laid down any rules, I assume that this first round will be for opening arguments. My arguments are below:

1)Books can be made from recycled paper. Even hard covers on books are recyclable, according to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org...). Hard covers are made of cardboard, cloth, heavy paper, occasionally leather, and buckram--buckram can be recycled (http://www.winter-company.com...).

2) According to Dr. Richard Shugarman, a volunteer professor of ophthalmology at the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute at the University of Miami, electronic books, as with all screens, can cause tension headaches ( Extremely high contrast from lit screens can cause headaches, Shugarman said. Reading dark print on an extremely bright background can lead to spasms of the muscles at the temples, which causes stress headaches, he said) and eye strain (Not only does blink rate decrease when you look at things up close, but your eyes also converge slightly , Shugarman said. "The pupils get smaller, muscles in the eye adjust the size of the lens, and the two eyes have to converge. Spending hours on a computer or hand-held device keeps the eyes converged and strains the eye muscles to cause headaches, he said. The eyes are generally more comfortable when they are parallel-your eyes are parallel when you look at far distances. To remedy this problem, look away from the screen a few times an hour to give eye muscles a break and avoid strain, he said). All information came from here: http://www.livescience.com...

3) This article (http://www.theguardian.com...) states that readers that were reading a physical book did better at recalling the plot of a mystery novel than Kindle readers as a study in Europe.
The article states: The study, presented in Italy at a conference last month and set to be published as a paper, gave 50 readers the same short story by Elizabeth George to read. Half read the 28-page story on a Kindle, and half in a paperback, with readers then tested on aspects of the story including objects, characters and settings. Anne Mangen of Norway's Stavanger University, a lead researcher on the study, thought academics might "find differences in the immersion facilitated by the device, in emotional responses" to the story. Her predictions were based on an earlier study comparing reading an upsetting short story on paper and on iPad. "In this study, we found that paper readers did report higher on measures having to do with empathy and transportation and immersion, and narrative coherence, than iPad readers," said Mangen. But instead, the performance was largely similar, except when it came to the timing of events in the story. "The Kindle readers performed significantly worse on the plot reconstruction measure, ie: when they were asked to place 14 events in the correct order." The researchers suggest that "the haptic and tactile feedback of a Kindle does not provide the same support for mental reconstruction of a story as a print pocket book does". "When you read on paper you can sense with your fingers a pile of pages on the left growing, and shrinking on the right," said Mangen. "You have the tactile sense of progress, in addition to the visual ... [The differences for Kindle readers] might have something to do with the fact that the fixity of a text on paper, and this very gradual unfolding of paper as you progress through a story, is some kind of sensory offload, supporting the visual sense of progress when you're reading. Perhaps this somehow aids the reader, providing more fixity and solidity to the reader's sense of unfolding and progress of the text, and hence the story."...
Therefore, physical books are much better for the reader, as they get to learn and recall the story rather than waste your time.

REBUTTALS:
1)PRO states that 'Electronic books are way more complex then the normal paperback.' Exactly. Why is electronic books being complex a good thing? When I want to read a book, i want to open a book and read, not turn this on and that to low. Complexity is confusing. Physical paper books are simple, and simple things are straight-forward, and...not confusing. Why would you want to be confused?

2)PRO states that ' Also paper gets worn and used after a certain amount of time.' Actually, if properly stored and handled, physical paper books can lost a long time (eg: not bending the spine while reading, not gripping pages tightly, putting on a shelf and out of the way when finished, etc.). If all of those are followed, how is the book supposed to be damaged or the paper wear away? In fact, the log of the RMS Titanic's wireless messages were found, surviving underwater. (http://www.novascotia.ca...).

PRO, since you haven't provided what rounds are what, I expect that the second round will be a second round of debating and refuting and the third will be a conclusion and summary round. Sorry if I did anything incorrect, this is my first debate. Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
River101

Pro

River101 forfeited this round.
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

PRO's forfeit disappoints me. He/She has not refuted any of my arguments, nor made new arguments after I refuted all of his/hers. I now have nothing to refute. I requested that the third round will be a conclusion and summary round. PRO hasn't responded, so I expect that's true. I don't feel like taking advantage of PRO by posting more arguments this round, so PRO's forfeit should mark the end of this debate, as PRO has no non-refuted arguments to summarize, but if PRO decides to come out with more arguments, disregarding the rules, I will be able to refute the arguments I round 3 as well as summarize my arguments.

PRO's forfeit should mark the end of this debate. Therefore, vote CON.
Debate Round No. 2
River101

Pro

River101 forfeited this round.
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

Extend.

Vote PRO.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by EAT_IT_SUKA 1 year ago
EAT_IT_SUKA
Sorry, I meant to say: 'Vote CON.' I apologize.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Sapphique 1 year ago
Sapphique
River101EAT_IT_SUKATied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Kozu 1 year ago
Kozu
River101EAT_IT_SUKATied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF