The Instigator
curious18
Pro (for)
Winning
34 Points
The Contender
MassDebator255
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Whites have never solely invented anything

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/10/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,802 times Debate No: 18271
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (6)

 

curious18

Pro

Okay, so MassDebator255 made a comment in this debate http://www.debate.org..., saying "white inventions have been built from other white inventions. thus it is a contribution made by the WHITE RACE. Black inventions have been built off of White inventions. This is not a contribution solely from the black race."

So any invention by a white person that is based of a black person is not solely a white invention. Also, solely white inventions can only be based on other solely white inventions, basing them off of inventions that are half and half, or any degree of mix, still counts as a mix, and not a sole invention.

For this debate, race will mean heritage, not just skin color or culture.
MassDebator255

Con

First, my point was that there ARE white inventions that are solely the product of white people, whereas there aren't any contributions SOLELY the product of black people. That was the challenge made in my debate, that there aren't any SIGNIFICANT contributions made solely by the black race. The reason you cant include any inventors or contributions made by AFRICAN AMERICANS is because they have benefited by the resources and education that have been provided to them by white slave holders. So anything that has come as a result of that can be attributed to the white men who brought them to this country. In other words, were it not for blacks being brought to this country, they would not have made any contributions. SO the question was, are there any contributions made BEFORE blacks were brought to the united states? I still think the answer is no.

So I'm assuming that the burden of proof that falls on me is to come up with at least ONE invention or contribution that is solely the product of WHITE people(whether they be American, European, French, Icelandic, roman, Greek, etc.) We are talking here of Caucasians VS. Blacks. Caucasian can include all nationalities, and cultures.
The title of your debate is that whites have never solely invented anything, and I am going by that premis. So if you are asserting that whites have never solely invented anything, all I must do is provide an invention or contribution that is SOLELY a product of white skinned people.

Alexander Graham Bell: Inventor of the telephone. A solely white invention. There had been some attempts in the past to build communication devices, primarily from a few Italian inventors, but they can be considered Caucasian. There were no Chinese, Mexican, Indian or any mongoloid races that had attempted an electronic communications device.(Source: world patent office)

John Napier and Simon Stevin : Inventors of the decimal system now used in mathematics, and Logarithms.

The game of golf was solely created by white men. Scottish men to be exact. And they are the epitome of white.

Sundials: invented by the greek.The first person to invent a sundial is not really known. Scientist can only hazard a guess by dating them. The oldest sundials are said to be Greek. They date back to 340 BC.

well, I could keep on going, but I don't feel that it is necessary. There are thousands of inventions, solely attributed to white people. You would have to show how those inventions, were reliant on the work of other races in order to win this debate. And that posses a problem, considering transportation and communication has always been a bit of a difficulty. Then you'd face the problem that even if the idea came from another race, proving it. I can come up with inventions that go back 3000 years or more, that were attributed to white people, and there would be no way you could prove that it came from somewhere else.

VOTE CON.
Debate Round No. 1
curious18

Pro

Thank you Mass for taking my debate challenge. I was not expecting you to make your case in round 1, but I'll address some of your stuff before moving to my arguments. Your other debate totally said "the world" not just the US, but that is off topic from this debate, as this debate IS about the world and not just one country.

Now, I'd like to begin my argument by saying there are four different ways inventions can be done.
1) Make something entirely new, not based on anything else. Since Mass says that education and benefits being provided by Whites, counts as being "based on" Whites, the same is totally true for past technologies as well. Like the helicopter is based on propeller technology. Because of all the stuff we currently know and have invented, finding 100% new things is going to be extremely rare. But that is one way inventions can be done.
2) Make something new, based on something solely from your race. If it is based solely from your race, than it, too, remains "solely" from your race.
3) Make something new, based on something solely from another race. If you make something, but it is based on something from another race, then your new thing will count as a "mixed" and is no longer "solely" from your race.
4) And last, make something new, based on something that comes from mixed race innovations. If you make something, but it is based on a "mixed" contribution, then your new thing still counts as "mixed."
Because these are the only four options, only options 1 and 2 will yield us "solely" white, or any race really, contributions. Options 3 and 4 will yield "mixed" contributions.

Okay, so let's bump uglies with my arguments. The following are non-white inventions.
1) Fire. Fire was invented and first controlled by homo erectus, in Africa. (1)
2) Woodworking. Working with wood is first seen in China and Egypt. (2)
3) Stone tools. Stone tools were first made in Tanzania Africa. (3)
4) Smelting. Smelting of metals began back in the middle east, Turkey. From there, the technology spread around the world. (4)
5) Oil. Petroleum was first found and used in the middle east. (5)

This means that anything based on Fire, Wood, Stone, Metal, or Oil cannot be "solely" white. Since all inventions are based off of these in some manner or form, which means every invention is either "solely" from one of the races that these came from, or "mixed." And as none came from white, that means that every invention nowadays is either solely non-white, or mixed.

We can also go further, since Mass says that if you are based off of someone else's educations, like "white" education, then it can't be "solely" either. All our current knowledge can be traced back to early Africa and the Middle East, and so that makes things two fold non-white, by past inventions, and by past education.

This also refutes all of my opponents examples, since the telephone is based on electrically generated sound, which is based on electrically conducting metals, which goes back to the middle east. The decimal system is based on numbers, which goes back to the middle east and Egypt. The game of golf is uses metal or wooden clubs, which go back to ME and Africa. Sundial, go back to using the sun to determine the time of day, which goes back before humans, but as far as humans go, back to Africa. Pretty much any example is based on the previously listed technology or education. (6)

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(4) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(5) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(6) http://en.wikipedia.org...
MassDebator255

Con

First I would like to thank my opponent for her swift response.

My opponent states: "This means that anything based on Fire, Wood, Stone, Metal, or Oil cannot be "solely" white."
My opponent asserts that fire, wood, stone, metal and oil are "Inventions".

I would like to point out to my opponent that these are not inventions. No one invented fire, or wood, or stone, or metal or oil. These are elements that are native to this planet. These are things to be utilized, not invented.

So what is an invention? INVENTION: 1. The act of finding out or inventing; contrivance or construction of that which has not before existed.(KEYPHRASE: "has not before existed".) 2. The exercise of the imagination in selecting and treating a theme, or more commonly in contriving the arrangement of a piece, or the method of presenting its parts.

Even if these were inventions, my opponent asserts that since use of these materials first showed up on the continent of Africa, that white skinned people could not have been the first to utilize them. This assertion is based on two assumptions:

1. That everyone that lives in Africa, since the beginning of time, has been NON WHITE.
2. That because certain tools have been discovered on Africa, and are dated in antiquity, that this must have been the first time in the history of man that these tools have ever been used.

This is a false premise because no one is certain of the first "Race" of humans. New science is coming in now that suggests that Africa may in fact NOT be the birthplace of humanity.(http://news.nationalgeographic.com...)
So it is possible, that even though some of these things MAY have arisen first out of Africa, that the first people to utilize these things could have been white skinned people.

Second, just because a tool is predated the earliest, does not mean that it is the first time it has been used. It just means it is the earliest DISCOVERY. Many times we have thought to have found the "original" or "origination", but later discoveries trumped that knowledge and forced people to re evaluate their assumptions.

NEXT: I would like to note that Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and should not be counted as a credible proof..anyone can go in and update, or change and edit wikipedia sources.

Conclusion: so based on the definition of invention, and the fact that wood, iron, oil, fire and stone are not "inventions" all examples I gave as "white" inventions, are valid.

Thank you and vote: CON
Debate Round No. 2
curious18

Pro

Mass makes several arguments.

1) "No one invented fire, or wood, or stone, or metal or oil. These are elements that are native to this planet. These are things to be utilized, not invented."

2) "This is a false premise because no one is certain of the first "Race" of humans. New science is coming in now that suggests that Africa may in fact NOT be the birthplace of humanity...So it is possible, that even though some of these things MAY have arisen first out of Africa, that the first people to utilize these things could have been white skinned people."

3) "just because a tool is predated the earliest, does not mean that it is the first time it has been used. It just means it is the earliest DISCOVERY."

4) "I would like to note that Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and should not be counted as a credible proof..anyone can go in and update, or change and edit wikipedia sources."

So now I'll address them.

1) First, "fire," "wood," "stone," and "oil" are not elements, they are compounds and a chemical reaction. Second, based on what Mass said was the definition of invention, "The act of finding out..." Voters should also remember that I didn't say non-whites invented wood, I said they invented woodworking, which is the technology of making useful tools from wood, which was first invented by birds and then humans. However, I don't think birds count as "white people." The same applies to all 5 examples. The technology of using those things were invented by non-white.

2) We don't have to be certain that they started in Africa, only that they didn't come from Europe. If they came from Asia, that is still non-white.

3) Mass is basically claiming that I'm making an appeal to ignorance. This is totally not the case, as seen in the source, appeal to ignorance only applies when something is not throughly studied or tested. When something is investigated, it makes for a logically strong assumption. However, if my opponent still rejects logic, we can use the same argument against every example he could possibly point out. We could, and should, just say that just because the Scottish are the first that we know of inventing golf, doesn't mean that pre-historic cavemen didn't invent it and just haven't been found yet. (1)

4) There are hundreds of legitimate sources attached to those wiki articles. And you can change wiki, if you want your IP address posted to the internet when I can totally just revert any changes you make back to a previous, accurate article. But apart from that, blind study peer reviews has shown that Wikipedia is just as accurate as Britannica. But, if Mass still doesn't like it, let me just pull the sources from wiki and copy and paste them. (2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)

That addresses those concerns and brings us back to showing that nothing is solely a white invention, it is either rooted in Africa, the Middle East, or Southern Asia, all of which are non-white.

(1) http://www.fallacyfiles.org...
(2) http://news.cnet.com...
(3) http://www.beyondveg.com...
(4) http://www.dieoff.org...
(5) http://news.bbc.co.uk...
(6) Leospo, Enrichetta (2001), "Woodworking in Ancient Egypt"
(7) Clarke, Grahame (1969). World Prehistory: a New Outline
(8) http://www.sciencedaily.com...
(9) http://www.stonepages.com...
(10) http://wysinger.homestead.com...
(11) Britannica, go figure.
MassDebator255

Con

MassDebator255 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
curious18

Pro

My opponent's account was closed.
MassDebator255

Con

MassDebator255 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by curious18 5 years ago
curious18
what?! come on moderator people, atleast let him finish before banning.
Posted by MassDebater255 5 years ago
MassDebater255
MassDebator255 has been banned
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
curious18MassDebator255Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
curious18MassDebator255Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
curious18MassDebator255Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made several mistakes in attacking curio's arguments: for example, while he noted that wood is not an invention, the practice of woodworking is, and so on. Curio made an adequate rebuttal to Con's case about white inventions and had a little quibble over Wikipedia (and yet offered no sources, except one)....Mass also forfeited since his account was closed, giving curio a point in conduct as well.
Vote Placed by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
curious18MassDebator255Tied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Sorry for the waste of time.
Vote Placed by thett3 5 years ago
thett3
curious18MassDebator255Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: f!!!!!!! and a troll
Vote Placed by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
curious18MassDebator255Tied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit, even if he was banned. He deserved it.