The Instigator
SpunkyPhoe
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
hellywon
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Technology: When is Technology too much?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
hellywon
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/8/2015 Category: Technology
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 544 times Debate No: 78510
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

SpunkyPhoe

Con

The question is, when will technology become too much? Someday, we might have self-driving cars, personal robots, and maybe even teleporters. When does this become too much, and do you think this will happen?
hellywon

Pro

I will accept this challenge on arguing that Technology is good, that there is never "too much" technology.
However before I post my arguments, I request a more in depth explanation on whether we are talking about the pros and cons of technology or whether we are using too much technology or not

Nonetheless, I would like to argue in my position and post my arguments next round.

Best wishes to Opp.
Debate Round No. 1
SpunkyPhoe

Con

I am talking about if we are using too much technology. I mean, someday they could employ artificial intelligence to jobs such as the police, military, teachers, etc. Will someday we not need gas for cars or batteries? But the question is, do we want this? I don't. I feel someday is enough.
hellywon

Pro

Thank you for the explanation, for I now feel ready to deliver my sides reasoning.

I want to say that there is never enough technology. Yes I agree that technology is improving and expanding throughout our generation and taking over our world but I disagree that "someday is enough." I can't stress the fact hard that we cannot live without technology. As bad as it sounds, I will show you my point of view.

A very long time ago, technology was limited. We are forgetting here that technology also includes medical gears, much easier transportation, and better communication. Because my opponent didn't give a definition, I will move forth into these examples and assume technology means things used with electricity. In our past, we had little knowledge about the world. With technology, it improved the world's knowledge at everything. Google something up and boom there it is. Same with hospital gears. Doctors had little knowledge about the human body, and they didn't even have MRI's. Now with technology, things have become easier. Emphasize, "easier." There are easier ways to help people, more over much beneficial to their health as well, which is basically my first argument: That technology has enabled much easier ways. Communication ran with mails, and post cards. Now we have messaging. Transportation wasn't easy, and we only had horses, or boats across sees. Now we have planes, cars, helicopters and much more.

My opponents stress that using too much will make robot prototypes in our future and cars that run without gasoline. Cars that run without gasoline is what we are trying to achieve in everyday life. That is because we are trying to stop the oil usage, because we believe that oil usage is also very high and endangering our world. It actually benefits the society much more than you think. Cars that run without gasoline brings benefits rather than harms, thus contradicting his side. What if we have artificial intelligence? Wouldn't that mean they would do their jobs better? For example, polices can violate the code of conduct in their duties, but if we put artificial intelligences to the work forces, wouldn't it benefit our society too?

Let me give you a cost-benefit analysis to show you a life with and without technology.

Life without brings harms. Not only does it disable easier methods and ways, but it can harm the people, animals, environment, etc. Life with technology has benefits. It enabled ways to make our world at ease.

My opponent may argue that if we stop the status quo right now, we still have some but not too many technology.
But ladies and gentleman, we have come so far in life with technology, why stop now? Technology can even make a cure for cancer, but if we stop using technology it will eliminate any chances of finding one.

Again, let me lead you back to the question: Is technology too much?

No it is not, because technology brought us this far in life. We should always see technology as something to be thankful of.
Debate Round No. 2
SpunkyPhoe

Con

SpunkyPhoe forfeited this round.
hellywon

Pro

I extend all my arguments. No refutation was made because my opponents FF'ed and should be taken points off of "Code of Conduct"

Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
SpunkyPhoehellywonTied
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 TBSmothers 1 year ago
TBSmothers
SpunkyPhoehellywonTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: very few arguments were presented by the con so argument points go to pro. also forfeiting your own debate is poor conduct therefore conduct points also go to pro.