The Instigator
DDhananjay
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
AlexanderOc
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Telivision is the main cause of violence in youth

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...
AlexanderOc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/20/2014 Category: TV
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,169 times Debate No: 59214
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

DDhananjay

Pro

these days all t.v. shows are filled with such scenes that teach the present young generation yo resort to violence at every step. the main reason for the same is the special mindset of many children and youth that inspire them to follow people like action heroes and role models like Martin Luther and Mahatma Gandhi are now a thing in past. present generation blindly follow their role models keeping aside the very fact of what's needed and what's not. blindly following salman khan and his pictures not only teaches them its basic value but also supports then to take in action stunts, which are more threatening than the so-called benefits.
AlexanderOc

Con

Pro's argument is irrelevant. Nowhere did he state what "telivision" nor how it directly causes violence in youth.

Furthermore, Pro cited no sources that confirmed his accusations and brought up T.V. shows for no reason.
Debate Round No. 1
DDhananjay

Pro

I am greatly amazed by the so - called argument put forward by my opponent.
being an Indian, i know best about the T.V. shows here. for your kind information, in the present society when problems such as unemployment and poverty are rampant, then, don't these shows like Crime Patrol etc. show a path to resort to any sort of violence to fulfill their needs?
please put forward an argument and not sheer criticism
AlexanderOc

Con

My opponent didn't refute my previous staement and once again broughht T.V. shows into the argument.

I must ask Pro to please stay on topic.
Debate Round No. 2
DDhananjay

Pro

my worthy opponent, i'd like to quote that television has no entity without t.v. shows. i think you shall ponder upon the topic again - "Television is the main cause of violence in the youth" and how is it so, i have mentioned in the above 2 arguments. when we talk about television spreading violence, we directly mean it to the violent television shows and not to the black box.

I firmly believe that your so-called point has no entity at all. I request you to please put forward a good argument, on how are you against the very topic.
AlexanderOc

Con

What is all this nonesense about television? I accepted this debate thinking I was refuting that "Telivision" is the main cause of violence in youth.

Why is Pro case-shifting? What is Telivision and what does it have to do with violence? What does television have to do with anything?!

These questions are unanswered and I'm starting to question my opponents intentions. He has yet to provide an argument actually addressing the resolution.
Debate Round No. 3
DDhananjay

Pro

my worthy opponent, if you aren't satisfied with the given arguments, i request you to prove your point, to why have you chosen the side of con for this topic.
for your kind information, I am not shifting at all. I am on my topic and the best example goes on to the above rounds, with lots of examples stating that television spreads violence. this is what has to do with violence.
yes, its total nonsense, nonsense about television that is continuously spreading violence in youth. give me at least few points that I can agree to you that its not. children spend a lot of time before it, and thus it has got to do with all the violence rampant.for your statement that questions are unanswered, i am in a state of deep flutter when I read these lines. I am unable to find any argument or question from your sides, thus, your point of questions being unanswered has no entity at all.
AlexanderOc

Con

My opponent is obviously deeply confused. Allow me to remedy this.

The resolution stated that "Telivision" is the main cause of violence in youth. Telivision and television are 2 completely different things. Or at least one would assume so since they are spelled differently.

My opponent is trying to explain why television causes violence in youth when he should be explaining why Telivision causes violence in youth.

Seeing as he has not even attempted the latter, he has not fulfilled his BoP.

My opponent is case shifting by making a debate concerning Telivision and then debating about television, therefore tricking anyone who accepts the debate into accepting a false debate.

Television causing violence in youth is not relevant to the resolution, and therefore and arguments made towards supporting it are useless.
My opponent needs to explain what exactly Telivision is and why it's causes violence to even have a chance at winning.
Debate Round No. 4
DDhananjay

Pro

I must confess that what all my opponent has said is nothing but a sheer wastage of time. I would although like to question him, that even after 4 rounds, didn't he have time to support his side with an argument rather than mere criticism.
i must make it clear that all this debate is about TELEVISION as TELIVISION as a word has no entity at all, on what my opponent is arguing. I prefer to peep in once into the dictionary before accepting the challenge, and will prefer if my opponent had done the same.
Typing mistakes are common in writing, but, that doesn't mean that the opponent develops a separate word and also the meaning of the same. The debate is all about television and that's the reason why i have been at my side all the time. I fail to understand how you joined the debate thinking the word to be "Telivision"
At the end, I think it wasn't what a debate shall be like. However, I'd like to take part in more healthy debates with my opponent in future. All the Best!
AlexanderOc

Con

I must say, I mean no beratement with the argument, I was only trying to stress the importance of using proper spelling and grammar to avoid semantic trolls such as mysef.

To answer my opponents question, I did not provide an argument supporting the negative resolution because I did not hold the burden of proof. It was only required of me to refute Pro's argument, and required of him to provide arguments and rebuttals. To avoid such a format, I would suggest my opponent put "BoP is shared" in his opening round to require Con to make an actual construct.

Other than that, all I have to say is,

Pro's BoP is unfulfilled. Telivision is not the main cause of violence in youth.


Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by AlexanderOc 3 years ago
AlexanderOc
@PreferNotToBeLabeled

That wasn't my argument at all, Pro just misunderstood it.

Read over my points really carefully and you'll see what I'm trying to get at.
Posted by PreferNotToBeLabeled 3 years ago
PreferNotToBeLabeled
It says category "TV" as in shows and movies lol. Violence isn't caused by TV. Just look at history.
Posted by BblackkBbirdd 3 years ago
BblackkBbirdd
There never used to be youth violence before television...oh wait.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by rings48 3 years ago
rings48
DDhananjayAlexanderOcTied
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:14 
Reasons for voting decision: Bad grammar and spelling by Pro. Conduct to Pro for Con using semantics. Pro never filled BoP why TV was bad for the youth.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 3 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
DDhananjayAlexanderOcTied
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 had the burden of proof, but didn't even attempt to fulfill it. Con basically just had to show up to win this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
DDhananjayAlexanderOcTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro once again had terrible grammar so that point goes to Con. Conduct goes to Con, because Pro was off topic, and the arguments go to Con as Pro really never provided an on topic argument.