The Instigator
audricaaa
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
tejretics
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Viking's would win in a battle against Samurai's

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
tejretics
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/27/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 363 times Debate No: 74342
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

audricaaa

Pro

Viking's would win in a battle against Samurai's.
tejretics

Con

I accept. BoP is on Pro to *prove* Vikings would defeat Samurai warriors in battle. By standard DDO maxims, I shall provide rules and definitions.

Full Resolution

Vikings would defeat Samurai warriors in battle.

BoP is on Pro.

Standard Rules

1. First round is for acceptance.
2. No forfeiture.
3. No trolling, lawyering or kritiks of the topic.
4. All arguments and sources must be within the debate.
5. Debate resolution, definitions, rules and structure cannot be changed henceforth.

Definitions

Viking - "any of the Scandinavian seafaring pirates and traders who raided and settled in many parts of north-western Europe in the 8th-11th centuries." [1]

Win - "be successful or victorious in (a contest or conflict)." [2]

Battle - "armed fighting; combat." [3]

Samurai - "the military nobility of medieval and early-modern Japan." [4]

Debate Structure

Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Pro's case, Con's case or rebuttals (as BoP is on Pro)
Round 3: Pro refutes, Con refutes and defends
Round 4: Pro refutes and defends, Con refutes and defends
Round 5: Pro refutes, defends and concludes, Con refutes, defends and concludes

Sources

[1] Google ["define Viking"]
[2] Google ["define win"]
[3] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...;
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
audricaaa

Pro

audricaaa forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

I will be approaching my case in this way.

First, the scenario regards a group of random Vikings against a group of random Samurai.

P1: All Vikings are *not* warriors. [1]
P2: All Samurai are warriors. [2]
P3: Warriors defeat non-warriors in battle.
P4: Random Vikings will have *both* warriors, and, primarily, non-warriors.
C: Samurai defeat Vikings.

This simple case allows me to resoundingly negate the resolution.

Sources

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...;
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
audricaaa

Pro

audricaaa forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

I extend all my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
audricaaa

Pro

audricaaa forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

I extend all my arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
audricaaa

Pro

audricaaa forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

Extend. Vote Con.
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 Chaosism 1 year ago
Chaosism
audricaaatejreticsTied
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: Forfeit by Pro. Pro made grammatical mistakes (possessive apostrophes in lieu of pluralizing) in his opening assertion; S/G/ to Con. Pro presented no more arguments than the opening bare assertion, to which Con presented Definitions and Structure, and then a logically supported argument in subsequent rounds. Con cited the only sources.
Vote Placed by gabep 1 year ago
gabep
audricaaatejreticsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Clean sweep. Pro forfeited and Con made the best (and only) argument. Pro made grammatical and punctuation errors.