The Instigator
imabench
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
IngranBrightriver
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

What doesn't kill you makes you stronger

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/19/2015 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 550 times Debate No: 81189
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

imabench

Con

I will argue that 'what doesn't kill you makes you stronger' is a misleading claim that should NOT be repeated or endorsed in society. Pro will argue that it is NOT a misleading claim and is factually sound, or whatever.

3 rounds, 24 hours between rounds, 3000 characters

Arguments:

1) Paralysis

What doesn't kill a person could in fact paralyze them from the waist down or from neck down, making them lack the ability to move some or even all of their limbs. Being paralyzed by something most certainly does not make a person stronger, since being paralyzed leads to several other bad conditions that only weakens a person even further

https://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.wpi.edu...



2) Mental illness

What doesn't kill a person could mentally scar and haunt that person for the rest of their lives to the point that they can barely function as a normal person, if at all. People can suffer from mental insanity and mental illnesses based on events they experienced that they survived and didn't die from that still leaves them weaker than they were previously. People who suffered from abusive or neglectful parents, were in abusive relationships, grew up in rampant poverty, were targets of violent crimes, etc. can develop mental problems later on in life that impairs them from being able to function as a normal person, thus making them weaker, not stronger.

https://en.wikipedia.org...



3) Loss of limbs

Explosions, accidents, fires, frostbite, etc are all events that can kill a person that if they do not can still result in the lost of limbs. This is similar to paralysis except that instead of them losing the ability to move their limbs, they just lose their limbs completely. Thus what doesn't kill a person could indeed make them weaker since the physical feats of strength they could otherwise accomplish are now drastically limited due to the losing of limbs.



4) Carcinogens

Smoking cigarettes is widely known to be extremely dangerous to one's health and even kill a person given enough time by causing that person some form of cancer, most famously lung cancer. Other materials and things that are also carcinogenic may not necessarily kill a person, but surely weaken them by taxing their immune system with cancer, which can leave a person physically weak and susceptible to other diseases. So what doesn't kill a person could still give that person cancer and make their immune system weaker as a response, since human bodies are very ineffective in fighting cancer on its own.

Over to you con
IngranBrightriver

Pro

I believe that there is some truth to the phrase "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger". Besides making a catchy chorus for a Kelly Clarkson song, this saying sums up one of the main forces that has been keeping life going on planet earth for million of years. I realize that there are situations in which an event may injure you to the point that you cannot function like you did before the incident and in many ways, become weaker; however, there are always ways in which, inadvertently, you become stronger because of these events.

One of the main reasons that life has persisted and flourished on planet earth is organisms ability to adapt and evolve. One example is a small child learning for the first time that when you touch the oven, it my be hot. They touch the oven, get burned, cry, and then in time, realize that they shouldn't do that again. This ability to adapt has helped many animals, including humans, survive. I realize that some experiences may weaken you, but I believe that whatever happens, you have gained something, be it knowledge, experience, or skill, that makes you stronger in some aspect. Because of this, every experience you have in your life does in some small way make you stronger, thus fulfilling the phrase "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger."

Finally, I don't think that this phrase should barred from media or anywhere else. Like most phrases and sayings that we use, it is not meant to be pulled apart, analyzed, and taken literally. It is simply meant to inspire people and give us the hope that even though we may be battered, scarred, and bruised by life, something good will come out of the chaos. Life is a struggle, and we have a tendency to tell ourselves things like this to help us keep going. Some of what we say may be true, and some may not be, but when you have some happy thoughts to think, life looks a lot brighter wherever you may stand.

Over to you, Pro.
Debate Round No. 1
imabench

Con

1) Truthiness

"I believe that there is some truth to the phrase "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger""

Some? Yes. But the quote itself is substantially misleading as there are many exceptions to something that does not kill a person that still infact leaves them weaker than before, not stronger.



2) Evolution

"They touch the oven, get burned, cry, and then in time, realize that they shouldn't do that again"

Yes but that same oven if severely hot enough could cause 2nd degree burns to the child's hand resulting in nerve damage, loss of skin, loss of movement of the hand, etc that would make the child physically weaker, not stronger, if only temporarily



3) Banning the phrase

I am not advocating that the phrase should be banned, simply that it should not be endorsed by society due to its misleading qualities.



"Like most phrases and sayings that we use, it is not meant to be pulled apart, analyzed, and taken literally"


Except many people do and use it as a reason to put themselves in greater danger for no reason whatsoever. Its like Yolo, or Carpe Diem, or some sh** like that.



"Life is a struggle"

Being white helps



"Some of what we say may be true, and some may not be"

And I am arguing that the phrase 'What doesn't kill you makes you stronger' is NOT one of those things. It is not factually sound, there are several cases of instances and events that does not kill a person but still makes them weaker
IngranBrightriver

Pro

1) Truthiness

"I believe that there is some truth to the phrase "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger".

I think that everything people go through adds to their experience and that experience in some small way makes you stronger. This is how I can say that there is "some" truth to the phrase; you may become physically weaker, but you are adding experience and while becoming weaker, you are also in some way becoming stronger. Yes, as you are saying, you may become weaker overall, but I think that technically if you are made stronger with every added experience, you have fulfilled the statement "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger".

2) Evolution

"They touch the oven, get burned, cry, and then in time, realize they shouldn't do that again."

First of all. second degree burns, since they only affect the epidermis and dermis, won't cause things like nerve damage or loss of movement. Most second degree burns can be treated at home (depending on the area of skin the burn covers) and unless it gets infected, will probably cause some scarring but nothing very serious. I get what you meant though, and like I said before, this incident has added an experience to the child's life that can help it make better decisions in the future.

3) Banning the phrase

I believe it is okay for people to use this phrase even if it may be considered misleading to some people. This is because is helps us be hopeful about the future.

"Like most phrases and saying that we use, it is not meant to be pulled apart, analyzed, and taken literally."

I think when most of these phrases are coined, they are not meant to be thought of in that way. However, there are always people that use things like this to put themselves in danger and to do stupid and dangerous things. This is something that I don't believe we can change, and if we did try to stop these people, many great quotes, phrases, and even works of literature and articles would be shunned. I think that words can be interpreted in many ways, and if someone interprets it in a way that is dangerous, it is their problem, and only theirs.

"Life is a struggle"

I think that life is not discriminatory, people are, and that everyone gets hard times and happy moments, no matter your race. Yes, people may be discriminating and make your life harder, but I still think that much of your outlook on life comes from within and that you do have a choice in how hard life is. Also, making a statement such as that is extremely unprofessional, and I would advise you from saying something like that in the future.

"Some of what we say may be true, and some may not be."

I don't think that I was actually referring to that in this statement, but my response to this is the same point I emphasized in the first and second topics.
Debate Round No. 2
imabench

Con

1) Gaining through experience

"you may become physically weaker, but you are adding experience and while becoming weaker, you are also in some way becoming stronger"

Gaining experience through an event does not necessarily erase the loss that someone suffers through that same event though. If someone loses both of their legs in a car accident and thinks to themselves "Well now I know to be more careful!" Then yeah theyve learned something but they still lost both of their legs. The losing of multiple limbs is far greater than a single learned lesson, which is why 'what doesnt kill you makes you stronger' is a misinformed and misleading sentence



"like I said before, this incident has added an experience to the child's life that can help it make better decisions in the future."

But experience of getting injured is not worth suffering the injury when the injury itself is permanent or severe



"I believe it is okay for people to use this phrase even if it may be considered misleading to some people"

And im arguing that its not because there are a great many things that if they dont kill you will indeed leave you weaker than before.



"there are always people that use things like this to put themselves in danger and to do stupid and dangerous things"

And the statement in the debate resolution is ONE OF THOSE THINGS. Hence why im arguing against it.




"Also, making a statement such as (being white helps) is extremely unprofessional, and I would advise you from saying something like that in the future"

You know what else is extremely unprofessional? Walking up to a burn victim and saying 'what doesn't kill you makes you stronger'




===================================================================================

The arguments above, including all the points not contested in round 1, are my reasons for explaining why tje phrase 'what doesnt kill you makes you stronger' is misleading, dangerous. Vote Con
IngranBrightriver

Pro

1) Gaining through experience

"you may become physically weaker, but you are adding experience and while becoming weaker, you are also in some way becoming stronger"

The statement "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" does not actually mention becoming weaker, only that you have been made stronger. So like you said, the losing of multiple limbs is probably a far greater thing than a single learned lesson, but that does not erase the fact that you have indeed learned a lesson. See, the way this phrase is worded, it does not mention anything about the multiple missing limbs. It only mentions the fact that you have learned that lesson, and are in some way stronger, even though you have lost multiple limbs. Now, I know that this wording does make the phrase slightly misleading in some cases. However, this comes back to the fact that phrases like this are not meant to be interpreted in this way. And, yes, there will always be people who take things too literally. But we shouldn't compromise many of the things that make our culture just because of those people.

"like I said before, this incident has added an experience to the child's life that can help it make better decisions in the future."

True, but like I said before, the phrase does not mention anything about the injury. Only the experience and lessons learned.

"there are always people who use things like this to put themselves in danger and to do stupid and dangerous things"

However, whatever people write, there will always be these people who take it in a way that it is not meant to be taken. For example, some people think that Harry Potter books are demonic. But should we not let kids read the books because of those people? J.K Rowling never meant them to be that way and if we took them away we would be losing one of the greatest pieces of children's literature ever written.

"Also, making a statement such as (being white helps) is extremely unprofessional, and I would advise you from saying something like that in the future."

I am not suggesting that you be incredibly rude to people who have suffered through a lot. I am only saying that people should keep using this phrase as normal, and as far as I know, most people are not that rude. Of course you will always have some people like that, but they will always exist and we need not concern ourselves with that group.

All these points I have used clearly illustrate why the phrase "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" is not dangerous, and is true. And I'm not going to ask you to vote Pro. Just that you vote for whoever was the most professional and whoever defended their side of the debate the best.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
Huh, posted the wrong one. Sorry about that.

Debate: http://www.debate.org...

Profile: http://www.debate.org...

*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Matt532// Mod action: Removed<

1 points to Con (Conduct). Reasons for voting decision: Conduct- Con swearing. What doesn't kill you can make you weaker physically. However, there are other senses, and Pro only needs one to win (if it is both weaker and stronger, Pro still wins). Now, if one wallows in their mistake, then one can't learn from their mistake, so the educational sense could fail. Adaptation: "What doesn't kill you makes your progeny stronger?" is likely true. However, not relevant for scoring due to the title. I would say that a person is probabilistically stronger afterwards, because, given this scenario, with person A and person B, equal in all but A saw and felt the consequences personally (but then got healed), my bet is that A > B. Con is right to say that we shouldn't seek what can nearly kill us. However, once that bridge is crossed, you can still learn from that situation. Neither side convinced me fully. I think it shouldn't be endorsed in society unless it is properly explained. This can do real good. Sources: Con's were

[*Reason for removal*] While the voter is allowed some discretion in deciding what suffices for a conduct vote, the voter seems to be taking this a little far. A voter needs to show extensive examples or excessive examples of conduct violations. A partially bleeped swear in one round doesn't suffice.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
Debate: http://www.debate.org...

Profile: http://www.debate.org...

*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: I-DrankYourMilkShake// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Con (Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Dog meat should not be served at US restaurants, hence why I added a vote with the same reasons as the vote below.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter isn't explaining their decision. He makes an assertion without the support of anything stated in the debate, and then refers to another voter's opinion. The voter must provide their own views, and not reference those of others.
************************************************************************
Posted by Bet-On-It 1 year ago
Bet-On-It
i will have to say i am in the middle on this one but it will very person to person. I will say i have done some really hard stuff but when i thought whatever it was was going to kill me i pulled out and nothing "bad" happened.
Posted by IngranBrightriver 1 year ago
IngranBrightriver
I know most people probably will, but I like the challenge of taking the hard side of an argument.
Posted by KingofEverything 1 year ago
KingofEverything
Siding with imabench here.
No votes have been placed for this debate.