The Instigator
longjonsilver
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points
The Contender
cjet79
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points

There should be a debate section for philosophy and "other" topics.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/18/2007 Category: News
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,293 times Debate No: 669
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (8)

 

longjonsilver

Pro

Philosophy: Debate is an integral portion of philosophy and I would love to have debates on ethics, political philosophy, free will, etc. but there is not a section.

"Other": Because it would be conceded and closed-minded to think that you can create a list of all possible debate categories. After all. I couldn't even find a legitimate category to put this topic.
cjet79

Con

Instead of making more categories (the top bar looks crowded enough as it is) there should be an option for the instigator to choose from a long list of topic choices. There could be broad categories like they have now...and then subcategories within those.

I personally just think that would be cool...might be a bit unrealistic for the website designers.
Debate Round No. 1
longjonsilver

Pro

Instead of making more categories (the top bar looks crowded enough as it is) there should be an option for the instigator to choose from a long list of topic choices. There could be broad categories like they have now...and then subcategories within those.

I personally just think that would be cool...might be a bit unrealistic for the website designers.

As long as the sections are added then I will be happy. I don't care where it goes. I just want a place to put it.

Anyway, it's not like we couldn't trim up. Science and technology could easily be combined. Just as education could go under politics and sports could go under entertainment.

There are many things we could do. All I ask for is a philosophy and others section for me to write in. I don't care how I get there.
cjet79

Con

Well maybe the whole idea of sections isn't well conceived. They have a key word search thing...i dont see why that couldn't just act as a sections thing. Just put in the topic into your key words and people can search for it. Plus this site is so small right now you can just about search through every active good debate.
Debate Round No. 2
longjonsilver

Pro

You're changing your advocacy but it's not too important. It's perfectly reasonable to have different sections just as long as it doesn't get too excessive. Right now I think many topics could be condensed and a few could be added. At the very least it could be said that an "other" section is needed.

It doesn't matter how it's set up. Personally I think a drop down box is the best. But we shouldn't restrict the debate topics to a set out list. That's why "other" is needed.

Most importantly the main point of this argument is to point out that we need sections for more types of arguments regardless of how the further structuring is laid out. After all, I didn't even have anywhere to put this.
cjet79

Con

I sent in a comment to the editors yesterday. I think there should be a traditional forums type thing on here. Since its kind of hard to "debate" some things. But forums would we much better for discussion. I know nothing about website design but so many websites have forums that i dont think they are too hard to create.

As long as they keep the real simple style and interface of this website i'll be happy. (and yes im changing my advocacy cuz im just putting different ideas out there...not really anywhere else i can do this so i figured id use the platform while i had it)
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Lydie 6 years ago
Lydie
I like that idea.

I think I would like the discussion style better than actual debates.

it can get kinda hostile. Myself included. It makes me angrier, more sarcastic and defensive...
Posted by cjet79 6 years ago
cjet79
Oh another thing...we should get some suggested debate topics. so if you dont feel like you know an issue well enough you can have other people debate it.
Posted by Rob 6 years ago
Rob
Whoops, don't know how that typo occurred. "Business & Economics" goes under "Politics & Society" as a subcategory like the rest, sorry. So there would only be four, broad-spanning categories:

- Arts & Entertainment
- Politics & Society
- Religion
- Science & Technology

I think these would cover pretty much everything that's discussed here. They could be reworked a little if issues arose (e.g., perhaps "Science & Philosophy" instead of "Science & Technology"? ideally no Philosophy category would be present, though, since philosophy factors into all four categories in different ways), and if absolutely necessary we could add a Miscellanea category, but I think it's clear that keeping the layout simple and intuitive is key. The debates themselves should be the only place people have to deal with elaborate, painstakingly detailed systems. :)
Posted by Rob 6 years ago
Rob
How about a simplified system like this:

- All
- Arts & Entertainment
- Business & Economics
- Politics & Society
- Religion
- Science & Technology

We could then use subcategories for subsections of each category that are sufficiently popular and distinct to merit further detail, such as "Sports" under "Arts & Entertainment", "Health" under "Science & Technology", and, since Politics & Society will obviously be the most popular category, everything from "Economics" to "Education" to "History" to "Law" to "News" there. This would keep the site's layout simple and intuitive, and avoid making it too difficult for people to choose between those top-level categories in the vast majority of cases. Currently, there's just too much overlap between the different areas to make it an efficient system.
Posted by Rob 6 years ago
Rob
The problem with a "philosophy" category is that most philosophy topics touch on other areas on the site. For example, some of the most popular philosophical issues really belong under Religion, Politics, or Science (or, sometimes, all three, as in philosophy of abortion). Philosophy is simply too broad and inclusive. What if you wanted to debate the ethical implications of a certain technology? Would you put it under "Technology", or under "Philosophy" because ethics is a major field of philosophy? What about aesthetics? Would that go under "Art" or "Philosophy"?

If anything, as noted, we already have too many categories considering the site's level of traffic. It would make more sense to integrate some of the current categories (e.g., "Sports" under "Entertainment", "Technology" under "Science", etc.), and then use subcategories for people who wish to browse more specifically within a certain topic.
Posted by Dolfan34 6 years ago
Dolfan34
I agree with you. You might have a hard time finding someone to debate you on this one!
Posted by brittwaller 6 years ago
brittwaller
Add me on board. Philosophy, history, and Other should all be separate categories.
Posted by Wondersick 6 years ago
Wondersick
I totally agree. It seems now that philosophy debates are being lumped into "Religion."
Posted by Scyrone 6 years ago
Scyrone
I fourth this. It is actually possible to debate this. Someone would just have to take the side of not having Philosophy or Other included.
Posted by shlh1514 6 years ago
shlh1514
You can't debate this, all subjects need to be on Debate.org
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by hark 6 years ago
hark
longjonsilvercjet79Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Pricetag 6 years ago
Pricetag
longjonsilvercjet79Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by revleader5 6 years ago
revleader5
longjonsilvercjet79Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by hamletswords 6 years ago
hamletswords
longjonsilvercjet79Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by longjonsilver 6 years ago
longjonsilver
longjonsilvercjet79Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by cjet79 6 years ago
cjet79
longjonsilvercjet79Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Thucydides 6 years ago
Thucydides
longjonsilvercjet79Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Rob 6 years ago
Rob
longjonsilvercjet79Tied
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