The Instigator
RaymondCrichton
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

The fickle-minded should not be concentrated on more than the 'intellectuals.'

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 1 vote the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/24/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 736 times Debate No: 78992
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (25)
Votes (1)

 

RaymondCrichton

Pro

I firmly believe, in this day and age the 'educational system,' concentrates it's efforts on those not up to par, with average standards. As a subsequent result; intellectuals are losing out. Why are the people that lack an 'objective intelligence,' pushed more avidly than the naturally gifted? It's ridiculous. The gifted, may or may not realize their innate ability. Thus should be provided with more resources.As they maybe settling for the measly 'pass-average.' The contention there in lies, in the fact why is there a major disposition to one side- not the other? When sound reason and logic simply dictate the fickle-minded shouldn't be the prime focus; the focus should be on the naturally gifted, the academics. Why? Because, they have the ability period. It doesn't make logical sense, to fund the losers.
Wylted

Con

I have a high IQ. I won't say how high. Saying so unneccesarily intimidates people.. I had special treatment in school. I would get Fs and be passed to the next grade. Teachers thought learning the material was enough to pass, and I knew the material. This happened several times. I learned I was special and could get by on my IQ. I quit school at 16, because what mattered was my IQ, not my actions. I am now 33 years old, working at Walmart and struggling with bills. If you treat high IQ kids as if they're special, and they'll believe it. This thinking is a disease, and will create an entitled thinking that causes underachieving. Smart kids will learn the stuff without the extra attention, but the slower kids will not. By helping the slower kids more, we can help them to learn the material better, increase their confidence and help them become more employable. Kids without opportunities become criminals, which harms society. Let's give these kids the attention they need.
Debate Round No. 1
RaymondCrichton

Pro

The repercussions are irrelevant e.g, because it's conjecture. Humans are inherently bias, so who am I to take your words, as "Gods," without evidence.

You argue it will "create an entitled thinking that causes underachieving." Gaining stature, from your personal experiences with regards to your education. Ultimately underlined by you, quitting "school at 16, because what mattered" to you was your IQ. Now correct me if I'm wrong,but that's the foundation to my argument.

My argument by core: more emphasis on the intellectuals, to act as preventive to underachieving. Now, the fact you were treated as "special," warranted your decision to leave (from what I understand). If there was more emphasis and structured education directed at your mentalities, that may not happen. As you're not special, you're by fact the same in reflection to the hypothetical "scheme."

But, the fact you're now "struggling with bills," could be as a dire consequence of a lack of emphasis on the intellectuals.
Wylted

Con

"Now correct me if I'm wrong,but that's the foundation to my argument."

You're wrong. The special attention on me gave me a big ego and hurt me in the long run, it was better spent helping somebody who needed it.

" The repercussions are irrelevant e.g, because it's conjecture. Humans are inherently bias, so who am I to take your words, as "Gods," without evidence."

You've provided no citations either and common sense dictates the people who need more attention should get more attention.

The less intelligent are more likely to end up in poverty and prison. http://www.vulnerablegroupsandinclusion.net...

If we want a safer society with less poverty and crime, than we should put most of our focus on making the fickle minded employable. Since they require more effort to make employable than higher IQ people that is where the focus should be. The intelligent, overachiever needs no push, to learn. they often find learning fun.
Debate Round No. 2
RaymondCrichton

Pro

I've provided "no citations," because 'logical and rational thinking' dictates you place your money on the fastest horse. That's generic knowledge; common sense is subjective, for everyone-- thus doesn't exist so don't use that as a foundation to justify a claim. Now that's my true argument. So evidence hasn't be required to rebut your claims, or substantiate my claim. Consequently meaning, I haven't felt inclined to provide any with just foundation.

You haven't formulated your argument strongly to directly assess, the actual argument despite you holding validity in regards to the repercussions and effects. You're absolutely correct, but you're not. You're not rebutting the root problem, similar to answering a question with everything besides the 'actual answer.'

So let me sound this out for you...find evidence that contradicts reasoning and logic and you'll win. Then the argument, will actually begin.
Wylted

Con

1. My opponent has dropped the argument that paying special attention to High IQ kids, encourages underachieving.

2. My opponent has dropped my argument that paying special attention to low IQ students reduces the chances of failing grades and thus unemployment. Having a significant and positive effect on poverty and crime.

3. My opponent has attempted to shift the burden of proof, and just metaphorically sits there with his arms crossed and his hands covering his ears singing "la la la".

The proposition clearly has the burden of proof here and no judge will disagree with the fact that he atleast splits it with me. The proposition has failed to competantly present a single argument and doesn't even attempt to make any rebuttals. I'm sorry pro, shifting the burden of proof, making nonsensical statements and ignoring your opponent's arguments, is not only a sign of being fickle minded, but a recipe for the loss I just handed you. I want to remind voters to consider the source vote.
Debate Round No. 3
25 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
Why would somebody ponder irrational thoughts?
Posted by RaymondCrichton 1 year ago
RaymondCrichton
If you were of a 'high IQ' you'd ponder even the most irrational of thoughts. Good luck, with future arguments:)
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
Incoherent jibber jabber
Posted by RaymondCrichton 1 year ago
RaymondCrichton
You're so blind, it befuddles my brain. I made sound 'one major fact,' and you ignored it because you simply cannot read between the lines well enough . We could argue about the technicalities of the argument,but I'm not;I'm seriously over it. I can substantiate why I could ignore your facts, and I did you just didn't take note or fully grasp what I truly meant. Whereas you did not do the same, with credible validity. And to be honest, not only is that irritating it's also toxic. Not once did I want you to feel overlooked or degraded, it was through a process of logic and elimination I managed to communicate that. When in truth you should've understood the logic and process not the obtrusive nature(you reacted negatively to) , I assumed you would understand but was wrong. On top of the word limit, limiting my explanations(which is my fault and I apologised) which you took to only go ahead and shoot a low blow, in the comment section. It's not nice to be misunderstood, and then scrutinised. I'm on a mobile phone, sorry for the slow replies and the lack of depth, of comments that duly need more.
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
You didn't have facts on your side, in fact you mentioned none, and my facts were ignored.
Posted by RaymondCrichton 1 year ago
RaymondCrichton
Did you know by way of evidence you're extremely petty? Unlike you, I don't have to degrade others to help myself sleep at night. You're the representation of the many pretentious (so-called) intellectuals whom thrive off feeling superior. Round 3 reflected that attitude, all too well. I had fact by my side for my ideologies. For one to stoop so low as to attack anothers' "intelligence," only reflects how low you really are. Good luck, with your future arguments:) Let your subconscious, or even conscious anger towards me help reflect the disquietude you should feel when speaking down to another by fact. :D later hater
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
You know that doing that doesn't make you look smart, right? It just makes you look even dumber. Whay next, are you going to start wearing upside down glasses to look smart also?
Posted by RaymondCrichton 1 year ago
RaymondCrichton
It's alright. I know your big ego was hurt. I'll try tone down"just for you.
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
Wow, you do try to use uncommon or big words (often in inappropriate ways), to cover up your low IQ.
Posted by RaymondCrichton 1 year ago
RaymondCrichton
Interestingly, I'm quite an unconventional person. That often bends the typographical and linguistic conventions associated with a word. Signifying a perceived, "misuage." How ironic, I could mistake your apparent confliction with my vocabulary choices to be rather fickle...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Sarra 1 year ago
Sarra
RaymondCrichtonWyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: I believe people with higher IQs naturally gravitate to sites like this. Maybe they are like me - having no real, intellectual stimuli in their day-to-day lives. I feel that Pro did not meet BOP. Sorry.