The Instigator
Silver_Serpent
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
Ragnar_Rahl
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Stealing is a natural part of survival

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 3 votes the winner is...
Ragnar_Rahl
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,181 times Debate No: 6157
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

Silver_Serpent

Pro

The primary method of survival on planet Earth is by means of exploitation. As defined in biological terms, exploitation is the proccess by which an organism consumes another organism in a harmed/benefit relationship. Plants are the exception because they receive energy directly from the sun, however, herbivores, carnivores and parasites all exploit/consume other organisms for survival.

Dictionary.com defines "stealing" as: "1. to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, esp. secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch."

Theoretically, any human is the owner of their own body. Assuming the equivalent of all other organisms, there is no distinction between "stealing" an organism's body as opposed to their possessions, because both are defined as the property of that organism.

Humans live by the means of exploitation. Animals are slaughtered, plants are ravaged, thus enabling survival. It may be argued that humans have permission or right to do this, as opposed to stealing possessions from each other. However, this is only true in the context of human law. In the scale of nature, a law enforced by a single species is cannot determine what is universally right or wrong. Surely lambs and chicken did not give permission to humans authorising their slaughter and consumption? If not, humans have effectively "stolen" the property of said animals. The same applies to any other organism that lives by exploitation.

"Stealing" also occurs naturally amongst members of the same species. For instance, it is a common sight to see birds stealing food from one another at the park. In fact, any organism is likely to steal from another of the same species if the opportunity arises. E.g. if a wolf leaves an animal corpse unattended in a shared dwelling, it will undoubtedly be consumed by its fellow wolves living there. By observing the behaviours of animals living in an undisturbed natural cycle, it can determined what is a natural occurence on planet Earth.

Stealing is an act of nature, between and amongst species, whether morally right or wrong. It forms the basis of exploitation, which is the only method of survival for many organisms. Therefore, stealing is a natural part of survival.
Ragnar_Rahl

Con

"
Theoretically, any human is the owner of their own body. Assuming the equivalent of all other organisms,"

Bad assumption. Property rights can only be originated from natural materials where one has willfully and through the use of their rational faculty , enhanced the value of something. This is achieved on the body by conceptualizing, i.e., filling that body with all sorts of useful information, among other ways.

Other earthly organisms do not do this, they have no rational faculty, and so can have no rights, no property. They live, so to speak, like animals :D.

Obviously, stealing from a human being is bad for your survival, it makes them want to kill you. Since nothing can be stolen from anything which is not human (i.e., a rational animal as opposed to a nonrational one), as it is not stealing to take that which is not subject to property rights, stealing does not fit into survival.
Debate Round No. 1
Silver_Serpent

Pro

"Property rights can only be originated from natural materials where one has willfully and through the use of their rational faculty , enhanced the value of something. This is achieved on the body by conceptualizing, i.e., filling that body with all sorts of useful information, among other ways."

I used the words "property" and "stealing" as an equivalent to describing natural occurences, and to expose the hypocrisy of human society. Because human law does not acknowledge any relationship between property and nature, it is neccessary to assume an equivalent of "property" and "stealing" in order to distinguish a comparison. Otherwise, human law is not applicable in the context of nature and the methods that organisms use to survive. Therefore, property rights, and any other jargon relating to human law is irrelevant if not being used as a comparison.

Furthermore, the word "natural" in the title of the debate is defined as something that exists in or is formed by nature, without human skill. This indicates that the title does not relate to humans and or their activities. Therefore, it is irrelevant to refer to "stealing" amongst humans in this discussion.

"Stealing" occurs in nature regardless of the risks, because the rewards substantially help the organism to survive.
Ragnar_Rahl

Con

"
I used the words "property" and "stealing" as an equivalent to describing natural occurences, and to expose the hypocrisy of human society. Because human law does not acknowledge any relationship between property and nature, it is neccessary to assume an equivalent of "property" and "stealing" in order to distinguish a comparison."
If such is necessary, your position is untenable. There can be no equivalent of the terms "Property" and "Stealing" when dealing with mindless organisms, any more than one can "Steal" from an unowned mountain by mining it.

"Otherwise, human law is not applicable in the context of nature and the methods that organisms use to survive."
Correct, it is not. Nature is anarchic, valueless, and nonteleological.

"Therefore, property rights, and any other jargon relating to human law is irrelevant if not being used as a comparison.
"
Sounds like a concession to me-- you just conceded the resolution cannot be true, only a comparison.

"
Furthermore, the word "natural" in the title of the debate is defined as something that exists in or is formed by nature, without human skill. This indicates that the title does not relate to humans and or their activities. Therefore, it is irrelevant to refer to "stealing" amongst humans in this discussion."
There is no other kind. You have already admitted "stealing," violating property rights, does not occur and is incoherent when applied to nonhumans.
Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Wolf_123 2 years ago
Wolf_123
Lol
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
You know, I did include in my arguments reasons why stealing was unjustified :D
Posted by Silver_Serpent 8 years ago
Silver_Serpent
This was such a stupid debate. I intended it to be about whether stealing was justified or not, but we ended up getting tied around the actual meaning of the title. Nevermind, it was fun, anyway.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
Silver_SerpentRagnar_RahlTied
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:23 
Vote Placed by dvhoose 8 years ago
dvhoose
Silver_SerpentRagnar_RahlTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by theitalianstallion 8 years ago
theitalianstallion
Silver_SerpentRagnar_RahlTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:25