Showers or baths
Debate Rounds (3)
My opponent concedes that baths are more relaxing so I will not elaborate on this in much detail. Baths are more relaxing because you can sit down and rest in them whereas when you are in the shower, you have to stand up. This was conceded by my opponent as true.
Baths have raised millions for charity over the years. From bank managers sitting in baths full of baked beans, to bank mangers sitting in baths full of custard, from bank managers being rolling down the High Street in a bath, to bank managers paddling down the local river in a bath, it’s all about the bath.
In popular phraseology, showers are seen as a bad thing. Ever heard the phrase “you lot are a right shower?” It usually precedes some sort of punishment for tardiness. Being a shower is bad. There’s a popular phrase about baths too, “Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater”. In this phrase we are being urged not to do anything to harm the baby with the bathwater. The baby with the bathwater is something that we should preserve. The baby with the bathwater is something that shouldn’t be discarded. This is because bathwater is precious.
The prime motive for using a shower is because it is fast. Being fast is often the wrong motive for doing anything. Go and stand outside your local branch of McDonald’s for a few minutes and look at the people who consume fast food, is fast good? Test cricket fans, is fast good? People who’ve been chased by a horse, is fast good? Hungry people, is fast good? The answer is no, fast is not good. Nor are showers.
Showers seem to have all the advantage in the matter. And old sayings I believe are not reliable sources. So in conclusion faster is better in the land of bathing, and bathing should be what it was meant for, not just sitting in your own filth. I am very excited to hear your next debate, and good luck!
The resolution doesn't say: 'Showering VS Bathing.
If it was showing vs bathing then I would have time argue about showing and bathing particular, since the resolution is about showers and baths in general I am allowed to argue about other details. My opponent has dropped all of my arguments. My opponent has provided no objective evidence to suggest that showers are quicker than baths. In order for this contention to bare any weight then it must have objective evidence supporting your case. It isn't always about speed, charity should be preferred over speed and since my charity argument was dropped it must bare its original weight. My opponent has also not sourced their claim that you get dirtier in a bath. Since no objective evidence has been provided this means that this should not affect the resolution. My opponent has also provided his subjective opinion on old sayings. This bares no weight since this is a subjective view and because this debate is an objective based debate. Unless my opponent can prove otherwise, this debate should currently be viewed objectively.
My opponent has not sourced the statement claiming that showers are quicker than baths. This is problematic because I have a been given no reason to buy this claim. Since my opponent has asked for an example of when baths have been used for charity, I will provide one.
This is an example of baths raising money for charity. Regarding showers being cleaner than baths on hubpages.com, this article is completely bias and subjective. Anybody can upload an article on that site and the article provided by my opponent begins with the following:
"I have to believe that showers would be better than baths"
This is completely subjective. 'I have to believe' is subjective. The word 'better' is a subjective description. He continues to claim the following:
" I decided to do a quick google search and found opinions on both sides of the debate."
This is on my opponent's source. My opponent's source does not tell me about whether they are hygenic or not. My opponent's source only tells me that they got all of their argument from a google search and conveniently forgot to add the links to the websites that they used. This is very unreliable and I doubt that it is facutally correct because if it really was then baths wouldn't be continued to be used.
My opponent clearly hasn't read my arguments because if they had read my arguments then they wouldn't have asked me why I am defending baths. Again, my opponent hasn't properly refuted my claim regarding old sayings. He states that they can be good and pointless but doesn't state why they are pointless in this particular scenario. This is basically a concession of this contention provided by me.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by famousdebater 11 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: This is a very simple debate. The resolution was not specific to bathing and showeting, merely baths and showers. This meant that all of cons arguments stood. Pro attempted to dismiss these as irrelevant to the resolution which they were not. All of cons arguments were dropped by pro except for the charity example. This was poorly responded to by con since he only asked for an example of baths being used for charity. Con did this and therefore all of his arguments stand. Arguments go to con. Con easily exploited one of pros very few sources. He showed that it was written on a website in which any body can edit and type up their own articles without an account! This proved that pros source was unreliable and therefore one of pros biggest arguments no longer stands because of it. This not only affects the sources points but it also confirms that con did in fact win the arguments points.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.