The Instigator
Elizabeth3648
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Snakes are gross!

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 3 votes the winner is...
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/14/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 537 times Debate No: 75300
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Elizabeth3648

Pro

The first round is acceptance. But they are really gross just saying lol
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Elizabeth3648

Pro

Snakes are disgusting because they slither and they are gross. When they are touching you all you can feel is their muscles contracting. They are poisonous and they feel cold and they are totally creepy. They have piercing eyes that freak me out. They are straight up gross.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

Because PRO is affirming a positive statement, she alone has the burden of proof - she must be able to prove that snakes are objectively gross. There are several components to this:

(1) proving that something can be objectively gross - i.e., gross to everyone
(2) proving that snakes in fact are
(3) proving that this is so for all snakes

If she fails to prove any of this, including but not limited to establishing a criteria by which something can be objectively gross, you vote CON by default. Further, if one of her reasons applies to some, but not all snakes, you discard it - because it cannot possibly establish the resolution, which applies to *all* snakes.

PRO states, "Snakes are disgusting because they slither and they are gross."

PRO makes three claims: snakes are gross, snakes are disgusting, and snakes slither. The first two are her opinion - in fact, it's circular reasoning because she's asserting the resolution to be true without establishing it, so you discard it. The only non-circular point she makes is that snakes slither, but she doesn't establish that slithering is an objective criterion to establish grossness. Is everything that slithers objectively gross? She doesn't prove this, so you discard it at this moment.

PRO says, "When they are touching you all you can feel is their muscles contracting."

Of course, this isn't true - because (1) their muscles may not be contracting, which is to say that they're at rest and (2) you'll also feel their scales, which sounds like a silly point but it invalidates this remark. Frankly, there isn't a takeaway or an impact of this. First, why are they touching you? Two, if they're touching you, even if YOU find that gross, that's subjectively, not objectively, gross - and thus cannot establish the resolution. Three, how is this gross? This is nothing more than PRO's subjective opinion. Therefore, you discard it because it cannot establish her burden of proof.

PRO says, "They are poisonous and they feel cold and they are totally creepy."

Once more, she does not provide an objective criteria to assess objective grossness. How they "feel" is obviously subjective, the notion that they are "totally creepy" is circular logic and a subjective opinion, and the notion that they are poisonous is factually untrue, because that only applies to some - but not all snakes, though the resolution requires that she make a case that all snakes are gross. Further, she doesn't even explain how being poisonous constitutes being objectively gross.

PRO says, "They have piercing eyes that freak me out."

As expected, this is nothing more than PRO's subjective opinion. She may find them to be gross, but others - such as myself - will not. Ergo, they are not objectively gross.

Then PRO goes on to restate the resolution, without ever having argued for it.


Because PRO has done nothing to advance her BOP, and is unable to post new arguments or evidence in the final round, vote CON.
Debate Round No. 2
Elizabeth3648

Pro

Yes it is my opinion. I never debate things I just state my opinion.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

PRO has droppd every single argument I have made, *conceded* that she is stating nothing more than her opinion, and failed to fulfill her burden of proof.

For that reason, I urge you to vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Reeseroni 1 year ago
Reeseroni
Elizabeth3648ResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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's Concession
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
Elizabeth3648ResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 fully conceded all arguments. They stated an opening statement, which wasn't backed by any evidence, Con refuted all of these in the following round, and Pro simply responded by saying that they "only state their opinion, and don't debate." This was basically a concession, Pro didn't refute any of Con's points, and said that "they weren't here to debate." Which I wouldn't recommend saying, in a debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
Elizabeth3648ResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 made the subjective claim that "snakes are gross". This was an assertion in the debate, and Pro never said that "snakes are gross in their opinion", thus Con naturally took it to mean snakes are *objectively* gross. But "gross" is a subjective term, so Pro's BoP would have to also demonstrate that there is an objective standard to measure "grossness", as Con pointed out. Pro's arguments were frequently logically fallacious, especially often committing bare assertion fallacy, as Con showed. Con managed to rebut all of Pro's claims based on *purely subjective* opinion, and Pro conceded that this was their opinion and non-objective, thus failing to affirm the resolution or uphold the burden of proof. Therefore, I deem Con's arguments to be greater and award him the 3 arguments points. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.