The Instigator
VIVASAMSON
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Buddamoose
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The message is more important than the messenger.

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/11/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,538 times Debate No: 21083
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

VIVASAMSON

Pro

The message is more important than the messenger because if it werent for the message, there would be no messenger.
Buddamoose

Con

Ah, but you are incorrect, for if there were no messenger, the message would be moot, as if it never existed, unless there were a messenger to deliver it.

First though "messenger" must be defined, as:

1. One that carries messages or performs errands, as:
a. A person employed to carry telegrams, letters, or parcels.
b. A military or official courier.
c. An envoy to another person, party, or government.
2. A bearer of news.

As well as an "instant messenger"-

The transmission of an electronic message over a computer network using software that immediately displays the message in a window on the screen of the recipient.

I.E.- e-mails, text, voicemail, newspaper, book, recorder, person, animal

A message is defined as-

A verbal, written, or recorded communication sent to or left for a recipient who cannot be contacted directly.
An official or formal communication, esp. a speech delivered by a head of state to a legislative assembly or the public.

As you see in the definition a message must be conveyed somehow to the recipient, even in the second definition it still must fit the parameter of the definition in that it must be conveyed(in this sense spoken.) Also for something to be considered a "message" it must be conveyed indirectly. Any speaking done in a personal, informal conversation does not constitute a message.

Being given these definitions of the terms, one must logically conclude that without a "messenger" the message would never be conveyed and therefore would not be a message at all. As the only way to convey a message would be through direct conversation, contradicting the parameter of indirect communication as written in the definition.

I look forward to your response.
Debate Round No. 1
VIVASAMSON

Pro

VIVASAMSON forfeited this round.
Buddamoose

Con

I pass until my peer responds.
Debate Round No. 2
VIVASAMSON

Pro

VIVASAMSON forfeited this round.
Buddamoose

Con

Same deal as before
Debate Round No. 3
VIVASAMSON

Pro

VIVASAMSON forfeited this round.
Buddamoose

Con

Buddamoose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
VIVASAMSON

Pro

VIVASAMSON forfeited this round.
Buddamoose

Con

Vote pro because con has not presented a case.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Buddamoose 5 years ago
Buddamoose
Woops vote con lol i was thinkin this was anotherdebate >_>
No votes have been placed for this debate.