The Instigator
ccfungclare
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Emilrose
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Who is more important? Steve Jobs(pro) or Thomas Edison(con)?

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 believe won the debate?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The Voting Period Ends In
00days04hours00minutes25seconds
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: Select Winner
Started: 11/10/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 6 days ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 142 times Debate No: 104928
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

ccfungclare

Con

Here are the methods and rules of this debate:
Method: Greetings--> rebuttal--> Point--> ending
rules: politely, no offensive words. no swear words. You are not allowed to forfeit no matter what.
So I believe Thomas Edison is a lot more better because he created light. Without light, we can't see. Long time ago. People still use fire. It is easier to cause fire disasters. So light is so much better. Because of him, we can sleep safely, knowing that the lights is hard catch your bed on fire. All Steve Jobs did was improved us. and also cause eye damage. But lights, they CHANGE us.
Emilrose

Pro

Accepted.

Due to my innate generosity, I will allow Con to make further arguments and will present my own in rounds 2 and 3.
Debate Round No. 1
ccfungclare

Con

Hi Emilrose! Ok, here are my other points, lets talk about the usefulness of their inventions. Well, lights, we can't live without them, i phones, we CAN live without them, right? And also, even without Steve Jobs, there are phones, just.. not as good quality. There are still android and sony, but light? if it wasn't Edison, well, I bet we are still using fire to light, really. So Edison is more important.
Emilrose

Pro

I will first remind Con, that, overall, the answer to the question: who is better Steve Jobs or Thomas Edison? is indeed a rather subjective one. And there are some flaws within Cons opening argument; I.e, she more or less states that Edison invented light himself, but anyone with basic scientific knowledge will know that light is natural, and that it was light bulbs he invented. [1.] www.edisonmuckers.org/thomas-edison-lightbulb/

Light itself, derives from the universe and even, to a certain extent, us-as we are warm, and light is brought on by warmth. [2.] https://www.livescience.com...

'The human body literally glows, emitting a visible light in extremely small quantities at levels that rise and fall with the day, scientists now reveal.'

'Past research has shown that the body emits visible light, 1,000 times less intense than the levels to which our naked eyes are sensitive. In fact, virtually all living creatures emit very weak light, which is thought to be a byproduct of biochemical reactions involving free radicals.'

'Almost everything we know about the universe is from the light our telescopes detect. When we think of light we think of sunshine or the colors of the rainbow, but colors, like sounds, are limited by the range of our senses. Just as there are sounds that we cannot hear because the pitch is too high or low for our ears to detect, so there are colors whose color pitch is too high or low for our eyes to detect. What we think of as light, the visible colors of the rainbow, is just a tiny part what we call the Electromagnetic Spectrum.' [3.] http://www.fromearthtotheuniverse.org...

In addition, prior to the invention of light bulbs we did have alternative light in the form of candles, which people would use in their homes. In fact, by collecting wood and lighting it with a match, you can easily have light.

In regards to Steve Jobs, though his inventions in the eyes of Con may seem minor, they are (in a modern context) significant. Apple. Inc has contributed heavily to the world of electronics, and introduced many great commodities to computer and mobile industries. [4.] http://www.techradar.com...
Debate Round No. 2
ccfungclare

Con

OK, good rebuttal and point, but may I remind you it was THOMAS EDISON who had invented light bulbs (sorry for the first few rounds, I wanted to type light bulb but I wanted to make it a bit shorter, as you know, I am TYPING not speaking, so its my fault.), without him, Steve Jobs might not be known around at all!.
Also, other than light bulbs (which he was most known for), He invented a lot of other things that help inspire AND change our daily lives, like Type-writing machines, Printing-telegraphs, electric telegraphs, Relay magnets(electromagnetic switch operated by a relatively small electric current, which also inspired us for batteries) ... etc.. and all that Steve Jobs created was i phones, mac books, iPods, and new models of all those...... So generally, Thomas Edison changed us more than how much Steve Jobs has.
Emilrose

Pro

Rebuttals/Closing Arguments:

Con acknowledges that I have put forward some good rebuttals, and then explains some additional details of her argument. However, this is what round one is one is for-instead of writing that Thomas Edison invented light, she should've wrote *light bulbs*.

In this round, she claims that Steve Jobs may not have been known at all without Thomas Edison, but this isn't necessarily correct. Steve Jobs was a considerably inventive man, so the chances are, that he would've been heard about in one form or another.

Given that Con ultimately failed to define and clarify her resolution, in addition to not providing very convincing arguments and failing to use sources, I advise that prospective voters vote PRO.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by zmikecuber 2 days ago
zmikecuber
First of all, I want to say that if this was a 7 point voting system, Pro would definitely be winning right now. She does better in S/G, Sources and Conduct. However, considering the way the resolution is stated, I am interpreting this as being a shared BoP debate. Con presents arguments in the first round that don't make much sense, because as clarified later, it was meant to be "light bulbs" instead of "light." However, in the second round, Con argues the inability of man to live without lights, and that if lights had not been invented, we would still need fires for lights. Con argues that due to this, as well as the fact that iPhones are simple commodities, Edison is more important. In addition, Con argues that without Edison, Jobs could never have invented iPhones. Pro does not actually present an argument in favor of her position, but instead says that Jobs was monumental in the technology industry. Sure, but that doesn't prove her position. As such, I believe Con wins.
Posted by zmikecuber 2 days ago
zmikecuber
I was going to vote Con, but I cant because my ELO is too low.

You're a fucking idiot for setting the ELO restriction so high, Con.
Posted by ccfungclare 1 week ago
ccfungclare
@Emilrose
This is your first warning of the debate due date, or else, the winner will be decided automatically. Thx
Posted by ccfungclare 1 week ago
ccfungclare
Um puh-leaz respect both debaters points. If you think it is stupid, then message me DIRECTLY, DON'T put it on the comments
Posted by SperoXVII 1 week ago
SperoXVII
"Created light" bruhhhhhhhh LOL
Posted by PointyDelta 1 week ago
PointyDelta
>created light

>being this stupid
No votes have been placed for this debate.