The purpose of a debate is to win, not to present the truth.
Debate Rounds (4)
Debate: a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers.
Contest: 1. a race, conflict, or other competition between rivals, as for a prize.
2. struggle for victory or superiority.
Competition: the act of competing; rivalry for supremacy, a prize, etc.:
Competing: to strive to outdo another for acknowledgment, a prize,supremacy, profit, etc.; engage in a contest
All definitions were taken from dictionary.com
A reoccurring definition here is that there is a "battle or struggle" if you will for a prize (in this case winning a debate). So to give a good wholesome definition of debate I would use this; a debate is a competition in which debaters argue contrasting points in order to have the views scored and a winner emerge. Since debating is a form of competition (from which the definition above says is a rivalry for supremacy) debating was obviously made for winning.
To say debating is not made to win is much like saying a court case is not meant to have a winner. Lawyers argue with facts (regardless of whether their facts are absolutely, 100% true or not) not in order to present truth, but to do whatever it takes to make their client win.
I leave with a final question for you to think about. That I will answer in the next round. If debates were not made to win then why is it in many debate competitions people often have to argue for a side they don't even believe is true themselves?
I again wish CON the best of luck in this debate and offer thanks for accepting this debate
Back to my last argument. The reason people are sometimes forced to be on a side of a debate they don't agree with at a competition is because the point of debating is to win. It is a competition thus a winner and loser emerges unless there is a tie.
Dragonclaw forfeited this round.
Hakoda forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by warren42 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's Round 3 arguments won argumentation. Everything else was tied.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.