Video games do not cause violence`
Debate Round Forfeited
Natsu145 has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
|Voting Style:||Open||Point System:||7 Point|
|Updated:||7 months ago||Status:||Debating Period|
|Viewed:||497 times||Debate No:||93790|
Debate Rounds (5)
I am willing to debate with you about this topic. I am relatively new to this site, however I have experience with traditional debating competitions. I think that a good set up for this number of rounds is Round 1, state some of your arguments, Round 2, rebut previous arguments, Round 3, more arguments, Round 4, more rebuttals and a summary. Hopefully you consider this set up suitable. Good luck!
I think that the setup you have for this debate is a pretty valid and good setup. So yes, I think we might as well go with that set up. So with that said, I'm going to be posting my arguments for the first round. Here we go;
-The Supreme court itself even said that video games do not cause violence. I just wanted to point this out. I would also like to add that the supreme court definitely wouldn't make a claim without actual concrete proof. Because they ARE the supreme court after all.
-US news article states that video games do not cause violent.
I'm just going to let you read that by yourself.
-From my own personal experience playing all of the violent and bloody video games, I can safely say that they haven't influenced any kind of dramatic or over the top behavior that has influenced me to do violent things. I would also like to add that I am in fact a minor as well. Not going to go into any more specific details.
- If video games actually DID cause violence, then wouldn't we be seeing more crime on the news? Think about it. Wouldn't there be more shootings, fights, and robberies? Of course not. Though occasionally, there maybe some person who DOES decide to commit murder because of video games. But it happens RARELY. Very rarely.
-If video games did cause violence, then wouldn't movies, television, and comics cause violence as well? There is definitely plenty of violence going on in all 3 of them. Though ironically, the people who accuse video games of causing violence, usually don't think that either of those 3 things mentioned cause violence either. And I do understand the violence is being accused mostly for the kids. But haven't you ever seen a little boy or girl coming into the movies watching something like the avengers, or something like James Bond?
- There are a HUGE variety of video games out there in the world. And not all of them are violent. Heck. some of them are the exact opposite of violent. So when your saying that video games cause violence. then maybe you should specify which type of video game genre it is. Because just saying that video games as a whole cause violence is wrong, because not all video games are even violent. But I know what you're thinking con, so in the next argument. I'm going to be going over why the violent video games don't cause violence.
-Violent video games actually RELIVE yourself from stress.
-I myself would like to ask the con an honest question about video games, have you yourself ever played a violent game like call of duty or halo? And have you ever felt any signs of aggression after you did? I just wanted to ask that.
Well, those are my arguments for this round, and as always, I wish my opponent, good luck.
Before getting on to rebutting the points stated previously, I would like to add my arguments to the mix. In this instance, I am often addressing more violent video games, as they are included in the topic and pose the greatest threat and significance to my debate.
First, let's look at some actual, hard evidence. There has been a task force report released by the American Psychological Association on August the 13th, 2015, stating that there is a "definite link to increases aggression in children who play violent video games." This statement clearly speaks volumes for itself. Not much else has been concluded, but there is a lot more research to be done and knowledge to be gained.
Another argument to the negative affects of video games is that they cause desensitization to individuals. Multiple studies have proved that those who regularly play violent video games experience a reduction in emotion-related physiological reactivity to real violence. They come to accept violence rather than be overly repulsed or reactive to it. Surely, this highlights the negative and violent affects of certain video games.
Even if you choose not to accept violent video games are the sole cause of violent behavior, it is clear that it is a large factor. Along with the increased aggression produced in people who play video games, players often watch their character perform violent acts with little or no punishment for them. If anything, violent video games could easily be considered something that nurtures violent and possibly harmful impulses.
It has actually been shown by the FBI that many perpetrators of mass shootings played violent video games often. Is it a mere coincidence, or could violent video games have induced those horrible acts of violence? Would all of those offender's behaviors been affected by symptoms shown in some of the arguments above?
Another point is that violent video games are more harmful than television shows, comics and other things of the like as they depict you; or a virtual version of you, performing those violent acts. It makes it all too easy to picture oneself doing violent things is if one has already done them in an alternate reality, with no punishment (referring to earlier argument mentioned).
Yet one more argument to point out is that video games often promote violence as a suitable resolution to various conflicts. Rather than simulating talking problems out in a civilized manner, the cause and effect flow on from an altercation is usually violence or warfare of some sort. What is this teaching the players, if not violence?
I will further these points in the later rounds, as well as rebut the opposing arguments. To my opponent, good luck in your rebuttals and the rest of the debate.
- Unfortunately, for your first argument, I'm going to be automatically debunking that one because once I clicked the link to that site, I got a security error on that site. Most likely because I have Norton installed. So if it's okay with you, I'm going to be automatically debunking that one. Next time, try to use a different web site. I would also like to say that even if video games DO cause aggression, it would be very little and would most likely just affect a particular group of people. Pretty much kids.
- "Another argument to the negative affects of video games is that they cause desensitization to individuals". Now I suppose that video games do cause desensitization to individuals, I don't necessarily see how this is a bad thing at all actually. Just because these people aren't affected by violence, doesn't mean their most likely to cause violence or do anything bad. It also doesn't mean that they aren't affected by REAL LIFE violence since real life violence and video game violence are two whole entire different things. They aren't going to become non emotional sadistic people. There is no actual proof of this. If there is actual proof, then show me.
- The con still hasn't answered a MAJOR question that I've asked him, has he/she ever played violent video games? If so, then did you feel any aggression?
-If you see all of the articles about video game violence, you'll see one thing in common, the age group. The people that are making these articles about video games are only talking about KIDS and video game violence. They didn't mention anything about adults at all, because they know that their mature enough to be able to handle these violent games. But did you know, the average gamer is ACTUALLY 30 years old. The point that I'm trying to make of this is that when you say video games cause violence, maybe you should actually say video games cause violence for children, because the people who make those articles know that video games won't make adults behave more aggressively. But, the average gamer is 30 years old.......
"It has actually been shown by the FBI that many perpetrators of mass shootings played violent video games often. Is it a mere coincidence, or could violent video games have induced those horrible acts of violence? Would all of those offender's behaviors been affected by symptoms shown in some of the arguments above." Do you have any proof? Actually, I think your LYING because I just found an article claiming that the FBI doesn't think that video games cause violence.
And another article;
So what do you think?
-"Another point is that violent video games are more harmful than television shows, comics and other things of the like as they depict you; or a virtual version of you, performing those violent acts. It makes it all too easy to picture oneself doing violent things is if one has already done them in an alternate reality, with no punishment (referring to earlier argument mentioned)." First of all, I never said that video games are more harmful than tv shows and comics, I specifically said that wouldn't violent tv shows and comics have the same effect as violent video games? Yet you still haven't clearly answered that question, the con seems to be trying to avoid the question.
-"Yet one more argument to point out is that video games often promote violence as a suitable resolution to various conflicts. Rather than simulating talking problems out in a civilized manner, the cause and effect flow on from an altercation is usually violence or warfare of some sort. What is this teaching the players, if not violence?" I would just like to make clear that I never said that video games are resolutions to various conflicts. I just said that they relieved stress. Of course video games wouldn't solve real world problems, because it's a virtual world. Also I would like to ask you something, in one point or another in life, haven't you ever had a huge anger burst and the way you tried to calm yourself was by maybe shouting or punching the wall (at one moment of your life). Video games have the same effect as this except you wouldn't be smashing anything in real life, but you would just be killing things in the virtual world. All of my fellow gamers out there would understand.
-Like I've said before, I WANT you to play a violent video game like mortal kombat or call of duty before you post your next argument. I also want you to tell me how you felt when you played those games. I think it would only be fair for this type of debate.
Anyways, this is my share of my argument. And as tradition, I wish my opponent good luck.
This round is dedicated to my rebuttals.
Your first argument was supported with a link regarding an article published in 2010. Given the little knowledge know around the topic, there could have easily been a change in 6 or so years. The American Psychological Association released their information in 2015, meaning it is more recent, credible and therefore valid.
Multiple times throughout this debate you have mentioned personal experience and opinion. While you said that you "didn't feel aggressive" after playing a violent video game, you do not represent the average across a whole board of people. This applies to my experience as well. Neither of us accurately represent, psychologically, the average person in this topic. Therefore, none of these points hold true.
"If video games actually DID cause violence, then wouldn't we be seeing more crime on the news?" Isn't there already enough crime? This topic is not specifically talking about robberies and shootings. The violence could be as simple as a fight in the school playground, r out on the streets. The violence can be reflected in many ways, and is not always on the news.
As for your point about television and comics, I have answered that. I said that when playing video games you are playing as yourself in the game and controlling it. You have the added simulation that it is you playing, not just a character in a television show or book. On top of this, it has no relevance to the topic, which centers on video games.
When you suggested that I was only addressing children, that is not true. These statements can apply to most people. As well as this, if it only has relevance to children, then that is still part of the topic. In a whole, you have to address all parts, and as children are the most affected, it is perfectly reasonable to base some arguments on that.
I can't argue with your next point. Sometimes video games are used for therapy, but this is not true for everyone. For a lot of people, video games wouldn't be a successful form of therapy, as for some there would be quite a few negative reactions.
My first argument is proved directly on the American Psychological Association website. A small amount of searching would have you find it, and the hyperlink still works on my computer. This being said, my first argument remains completely valid.
There is an article saying that the FBI found that some, and I stress the word some, perpetrators of mass shootings played video games regularly. Once again, I am not saying that they performed the acts they did solely because of video games, just remarking on that information.
The information you presented for the average age of a games was published in 2012, so the age group may have changed, considering there was a 7 year age drop in the time span of 1 year. That being said, it is of no particular importance to this topic anyway.
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click thelink at the top of the page.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate