The Instigator
Kris
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Brian314
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points

Verifiable constitution of a species

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
Con Tied Pro
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/17/2011 Category: Science
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 826 times Debate No: 15996
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Kris

Con

The idea of a new species to science is somewhat philosophical. I put it to the debating community that it's almost impossible to verify the criteria for a new species. I put it further that the current accepted definition of a species is inadequate and isn't an acceptable fall-back for debate.
Brian314

Pro

I accept my opponent's challenge. Firstly, I would like to clarify the resolution as: "It is possible to verify the criteria for a new species", a species being "a class of individuals having common attributes and designated by a common name"[1]. I would like my opponent to clarify what he means by the current accepted definition of a species being inadequate, and how it relates to the resolution. I await my opponent's case in the next round.

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Kris

Con

I do not accept the changes you made to the debate. I recognize my failing in not providing what I called "the current accepted definition of a species" but do not recognize Merriam-Webster as a sufficient provider of said definition. Merriam-Webster is a dictionary that vaguely documents the usage of language, without providing rigorous references itself, and therefore should not be taken as gospel. Another failing of the use of Merriam-Webster to provide a definition for debate purposes is that it is necessarily generalist, not specialist. Gone are the days of specialists contributing to dictionaries (e.g. the efforts of Lamarck in editing a decades-long encyclopedia of natural history, the name of which escapes me, mainly because it was written in French).

The definition you quote is crap basically, it could apply to any taxonomic level, not just species. The definition of species I had in mind, and I'm sorry to not be able to quote specific references (I prefer to debate using my own ideas, however folly that may seem to the debating community), was something along the lines of "a group of individuals capable of reproducing viable offspring", viable meaning also capable of reproducing offspring, i.e. sexually fertile. It's impossible to use this as a foolproof definition, for several reasons, which I will go into if you reply to this.
Brian314

Pro

I accept my opponent's definition as "a group of individuals capable of reproducing viable offspring". However, my opponent is still unclear as to what the resolution is. I ask that he clarify a definite resolution to argue upon, since all he has provided is that "the idea of a new species to science is somewhat philosophical" and that it is almost impossible to verify criteria of new species. Please specify a definitely resolution that we are arguing upon.
Debate Round No. 2
Kris

Con

Kris forfeited this round.
Brian314

Pro

As my opponent has forfeited the round, and has rejected my proposal for a definite resolution without clarifying one of his own, I ask that you please vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 3
Kris

Con

Kris forfeited this round.
Brian314

Pro

Once again, my opponent has forfeited, without ever properly defining a resolution. Given the fact that the debate has only one round left, and that the Instigator still has not clarified what the debate is to be about, I must ask that you vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 4
Kris

Con

Kris forfeited this round.
Brian314

Pro

As my opponent has forfeited three out of the five rounds of this debate, I ask that you please vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
KrisBrian314Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: ...
Vote Placed by Johnicle 6 years ago
Johnicle
KrisBrian314Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: "Kris forfeited this round."