The Instigator
Terefall
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mixer
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Standards of professional behavior ought to be valued above freedom of speech in social networking.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Mixer
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/9/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,782 times Debate No: 10400
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

Terefall

Pro

C1: One must be aware of the contingency of being divulged and exposed via the content one posts and displays on social networking sites.
C2: Behaving appropriately is more sensible than behaving inappropriately.
C3: Those who choose to conduct themselves inaptly can do as they please, but it does not necessarily mean it's in their best interest.

Value: Well-being
Criterion: Decent Portrayal/Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Mixer

Con

First, I would like to thank my opponent for starting this debate.

Before I begin, I am going to reject your definition for value because you have not sourced it and you have not used it correctly. If you want the word value to work in your resolution, then that definition must be replaced.

Here is a better definition:

Value :to consider with respect to worth, excellence, usefulness, or importance - to regard or esteem highly
http://dictionary.reference.com...

I must remind my opponent that as instigator and pro, he bears the burden of proof. He must prove his contentions to be true. So far he has just stated them, so I as con and the contender cannot do much to refute them.

I will do as much as I can in this round, and that is to attack the credentials of his sources.
I am not quite sure how he used this source, or if he didn't, how he plans to use it in the future.
I had to search to find your source. Next time, please post a link.
When I did find your source, I must admit that I was very confused.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is a paper written in 1943 about the basic needs of people. The only thing remotely close to my opponent's resolution is respect. It is the only part where it mentions other people's interaction at all. The paper states that if a person does not get respect, they will have low self esteem. I have yet to see what this has to do with the resolution.

I would like to stress when that paper was written. Clearly in 1943, Maslow did not have social networking in mind.

I have more to say, but not the time to say it.
Best of luck
Debate Round No. 1
Terefall

Pro

"I believe that the very purpose of life is to be happy. From the very core of our being, we desire contentment. In my own limited experience I have found that the more we care for the happiness of others, the greater is our own sense of well-being. Cultivating a close, warmhearted feeling for others automatically puts the mind at ease. It helps remove whatever fears or insecurities we may have and gives us the strength to cope with any obstacles we encounter. It is the principal source of success in life. Since we are not solely material creatures, it is a mistake to place all our hopes for happiness on external development alone. The key is to develop inner peace."
Dalai Lama, winner of the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize.

It is because I agree with: Dalai Lama, winner of the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize, in the position that social contracts lead to well-being, that I feel compelled to affirm today's resolution, Resolved: Standards of Professional Behavior ought to be valued above Freedom of Expression on Social Networking sites.
Source: Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Ought: used to express duty or moral obligation
The highest value within today's round is well-being. Well-being is defined as a good or satisfactory condition of existence; a state characterized by health, happiness, and prosperity; welfare.
Well-being is most important in today's round because it is a main thing the human race strives for, and it can be achieved with the use of a social contract.
The best criterion for evaluating this resolution is Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It is defined as the order of necessities to achieve well-being. It achieves my value of well-being because the more appropriate you express yourself, better the chance of people liking you.
Contention 1:
One must be aware of the contingency of being divulged and exposed via the content one posts and displays on social networking sites.
Contention 2:
Behaving appropriately is more sensible than behaving inappropriately.
Contention 3: Those who choose to conduct themselves inaptly can do as they please, but it does not necessarily mean it's in their best interest.

Contention 1:
One must be aware of the contingency of being divulged and exposed via the content one posts and displays on social networking sites.
-
"Lawyers for Janice Roman, the defendant in the lawsuit, believe information posted on John Leduc's private Facebook site – normally accessible only to his approved "friends" – may be relevant to his claim an accident in Lindsay in 2004 lessened his enjoyment of life.
As a result of the ruling by Justice David Brown of Ontario's Superior Court of Justice, Leduc must now submit to cross-examination by Roman's lawyers about what his Facebook page contains.
Brown's Feb. 20 ruling also makes clear that lawyers must now explain to their clients "in appropriate cases" that postings on Facebook or other networking sites – such as MySpace, LinkedIn and even blogs – may be relevant to allegations in a lawsuit, said Tariq Remtulla, a Toronto lawyer who has been following the issue.
This could easily apply in a personal injury case in which a litigant claims his or her quality of life has been affected, Remtulla said.
"If you are alleging that, as a result of an accident, you have not been able to enjoy life the same way and there is a photo taken after the accident showing you skiing or exercising … that could be relevant," the civil litigation and intellectual property lawyer said in an interview yesterday."
~ http://www.lockergnome.com...

There are many who have lost jobs and have gone through unnecessary stress due to inappropriate content they posted on their websites. Employers are now using this to ensure that they represent the company in an appropriate manner. Social networking sites are no longer private.
One must be aware of the risks they take while posting anything negative or displeasing on their website.
Everything you do on the internet is cached and it may cost you your job and maybe even worse consequences. Soon, there will be no impunity with what you do.

Contention 2:
Behaving appropriately is more congruous than behaving inappropriately.
The benefits of behaving appropriately:
•Representing yourself in a way that people will find appealing.
•Employers being satisfied with your appearance and the way you represent the company.
•It may make a great first impression.
The cons of behaving inappropriately:
•Employers being angry at you for not representing the company appropriately.
•Giving a poor first impression.
•People may NOT find you appealing.
It is obvious that the benefits supersede.
Social networking sites can be used for your social benefit. You will often make good first impressions, and be respected.

Contention 3:
Those who choose to conduct themselves inaptly can do as they please, but it does not necessarily mean it's in their best interest.
I have shown you that professional behavior on social networking sites may induce well being, but the resolution has a word in there that twists everything a lot for my argument.
Ought - used to express duty or moral obligation.
You OUGHT to behave appropriately.
You OUGHT to go to sleep.
These also can be replaced with should and removal of the infinitive (to);
You should behave properly.
You should go to sleep.
The resolution doesn't say:
"Standards of professional behavior ARE to be valued above Freedom of Expression on Social Networking sites."
Ought means you are obliged. It is in your BEST INTEREST to behave that way. Do you absolutely have to? No. People can choose to behave properly.
It all comes down to being a social contract.
You follow that certain set of professional standards for your well being. Isn't that what social contracts are ultimately for?

I have shown you that one must be aware of the contingency of being divulged and exposed via the content one posts and the information they display on social networking sites, that behaving appropriately is more congruous than behaving inappropriately, and that those who choose to conduct themselves inaptly can do as they please, but it does not necessarily mean it's in their best interest.
For these reasons, we can clearly conclude that well-being should be upheld and that Standards of Professional Behavior ought to be valued above Freedom of Expression on Social Networking sites.
Mixer

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for posting a quick reply.

"'I believe that the very purpose of life is to be happy. From the very core of our being, we desire contentment. In my own limited experience I have found that the more we care for the happiness of others, the greater is our own sense of well-being. Cultivating a close, warmhearted feeling for others automatically puts the mind at ease. It helps remove whatever fears or insecurities we may have and gives us the strength to cope with any obstacles we encounter. It is the principal source of success in life. Since we are not solely material creatures, it is a mistake to place all our hopes for happiness on external development alone. The key is to develop inner peace.'
Dalai Lama, winner of the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize."

I am not sure this relates to the topic at hand, which is social networking.

"Resolved: Standards of Professional Behavior ought to be valued above Freedom of Expression on Social Networking sites."

That really didn't change much, so I accept your resolved premise.

My opponent has failed to correctly source his information, so I will do it for him.
Ought- http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Well being- http://www.merriam-webster.com...
I accept the definitions as provided.

"The best criterion for evaluating this resolution is Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It is defined as the order of necessities to achieve well-being."

Maslow's theory states that one of the last things needed is respect for others and respect from others. There are many other things in his theory needed more than these.

" It achieves my value of well-being because the more appropriate you express yourself, better the chance of people liking you."
Why? You have not provided any information why this would be the case.

REFUTATION OF CONTENTION 1:

"'Lawyers for Janice Roman, the defendant in the lawsuit, believe information posted on John Leduc's private Facebook site – normally accessible only to his approved "friends" – may be relevant to his claim an accident in Lindsay in 2004 lessened his enjoyment of life.
As a result of the ruling by Justice David Brown of Ontario's Superior Court of Justice, Leduc must now submit to cross-examination by Roman's lawyers about what his Facebook page contains.
Brown's Feb. 20 ruling also makes clear that lawyers must now explain to their clients "in appropriate cases" that postings on Facebook or other networking sites – such as MySpace, LinkedIn and even blogs – may be relevant to allegations in a lawsuit, said Tariq Remtulla, a Toronto lawyer who has been following the issue.
This could easily apply in a personal injury case in which a litigant claims his or her quality of life has been affected, Remtulla said.
"If you are alleging that, as a result of an accident, you have not been able to enjoy life the same way and there is a photo taken after the accident showing you skiing or exercising … that could be relevant," the civil litigation and intellectual property lawyer said in an interview yesterday."
~ http://www.lockergnome.com...;

Freedom of expression, according to legal precedent, does not include harassment. Therefore, this information is irrelevant.

"Employers are now using this to ensure that they represent the company in an appropriate manner."

What if someone is self-employed or doesn't represent a company?

"Social networking sites are no longer private."

Social networks were never private. That is the entire point of a social network; For people to talk, mingle, share jokes, pictures etc.

REFUTATION OF CONTENTION 2:

My opponent has stated two contentions for contention 2. They are:

"Behaving appropriately is more sensible than behaving inappropriately." and
"Behaving appropriately is more congruous than behaving inappropriately."

My opponent also states the "benefits" of behaving appropriately. I will post a short rebuttal for each.

"Representing yourself in a way that people will find appealing."
On a social networking site, many people will not find it appealing, but rather boring.

"Employers being satisfied with your appearance and the way you represent the company."
Only if you are an employee of a company. If not, the point is moot.

"It may make a great first impression."
That also gives it the possibility of not making a great first impression.

The "cons" of behaving inappropriately:

"Employers being angry at you for not representing the company appropriately."
Once again, if you do not have an employer, then they can't be angry at you.

"Giving a poor first impression."
It may not be a poor first impression. It may strike someone that I am a vibrant young individual instead of some dry, stagnant, static person.

"People may NOT find you appealing."
Once again, it gives the opportunity to find you appealing as well.

It is obvious that the "benefits" do not outweigh the "cons".

REFUTATION OF CONTENTION 3:

"Contention 3:
Those who choose to conduct themselves inaptly can do as they please, but it does not necessarily mean it's in their best interest."
They can only do as they please as long as it is within the laws.

"Ought - used to express duty or moral obligation"

Obligate - to pledge, commit, or bind
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Bind- to make compulsory or obligatory
http://dictionary.reference.com...

I know, a bit of a circular definition, but my point is that when you have an obligation to do something, it is compulsory to do that obligation.

Even with my opponents trickery, he has not proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that his resolution is true. He also keeps using social contract and has not yet defined it.

Social Contract -the view that persons' moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement between them to form society.
http://www.iep.utm.edu...

"You OUGHT to behave appropriately.
You OUGHT to go to sleep."

Obviously, these statements are not related to each other at all.
Once would cause death if not complied with.

"It all comes down to being a social contract.
You follow that certain set of professional standards for your well being. Isn't that what social contracts are ultimately for?"

No. You have not provided any information what forming a society has to do with social networking or freedom of expression.

CONCLUSION PRO:
"I have shown you that one must be aware of the contingency of being divulged and exposed via the content one posts and the information they display on social networking sites,"

One random court case and an assumption about employers does not show me enough information about the contingency being divulged and exposed information.

"that behaving appropriately is more congruous than behaving inappropriately,"
Not beyond a shadow of a doubt.

"and that those who choose to conduct themselves inaptly can do as they please, but it does not necessarily mean it's in their best interest."
I have proven that they can not do as they please, but rather what lies within the laws.

All contentions are refuted, therefore the resolution is negated.

CONCLUSION CON:
My opponent has provided little or no information for his contentions, and what little information he has provided has been refuted. Also, he has provided little information for the resolution. He barely mentioned social networking and did not mention freedom of expression. Therefore, we can clearly conclude that standards of professional behavior ought not to be valued above freedom of expression on social networking sites.

It was a tad bit hard sorting through your argument, but I did the best I could. Best of luck in the final round. I look forward to your reply.

PS
I really wanted to say more, but I was limited to only 8000 characters, of which I have none left after this sentence.
Debate Round No. 2
Terefall

Pro

Terefall forfeited this round.
Mixer

Con

hmm... interesting. I did a poor job in this debate, but i still believe my opponent did poorer. Extend all arguments. Thanks for the debate
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by headphonegut 7 years ago
headphonegut
social contract is a theory made by thomas hobbes and john locke there are to sides to social contract hobbes theory is that the government must have absolute power in order to protect the people lockes is that the people must give up something for the government to protect them
Posted by headphonegut 7 years ago
headphonegut
this is a debate that is happening in UIL
Posted by Mixer 7 years ago
Mixer
i am pretty busy today. I will post my first argument after i get home form work tomorrow.
Posted by Sniperjake1994 7 years ago
Sniperjake1994
Oh and I disagree.
Posted by Sniperjake1994 7 years ago
Sniperjake1994
I'll like to take if but i'm busy. Challenge it again during winter break:)
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Viewed: 1,060 times

What? How?
Posted by Ange154 7 years ago
Ange154
I agree
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Mixer 7 years ago
Mixer
TerefallMixerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07