You choose the topic
Debate Rounds (4)
If all of the topics offered by con are offensive, overly serious, skewed, truistic or otherwise inaccessible, then I'll choose a different topic entirely.
There are no hard line rules, just don't be a dick. I reserve the right to expand on what that means as necessary, but hopefully I won't have to. Just be a decent human being, and let's have a fun round!
1) Females Like Arrogant Men
2) I can be more inspiring than you
3)Dragons and unicorns exist
I - A pronoun used to refer to one's self https://en.wikipedia.org...(pronoun)
You - A pronoun used to refer to the person or people one is speaking to http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
Inspiring - Verb: To fill with an animating, quickening, or exhalting influence http://www.dictionary.com...
1) In this debate Pro is not attempting to argue that he can be more inspiring than Con, rather that the self can be more inspiring than another. The use of 'I' or 'You' should be understood as referencing the concept of self, and the concept of another respectively rather than the Pro or the Con specifically.
2) If Pro can show that I can be more inspiring than you, he deserves to get the vote. In order to do this, Pro does not have to prove that I will always be more inspiring than you, only that I can be more inspiring than you. If any instance of I being more inspiring than you is upheld throughout the course of this debate, Pro has won.
1) Self Preservation-
One has a natural desire to ensure that she or he stays alive. In the mornings we wake up, get out of bed, use the bathroom, maintain our personal hygiene and eat because we have an inherent desire to sustain ourselves. If one has an itch, she scratches it; if one is tired, she rests. The driving force behind ensuring that we stay alive doesn't come from you, but from I. One may understand the importance of their life beyond themselves, but in a moment of danger the driving inspiration to take care of one's self comes from within.
2)Boredom and entertainment-
When one becomes bored, she does not seek out entertainment for the sake of others, but for her own sake. We don't play with straw wrappers to stack items on our desk in order to satisfy another, we do so because our own brains drive us to find ways to keep ourselves entertained and occupied. This argument is important as it shows instances of spontaneous play as being motivated from the self rather than from another
3) Mental illness doesn't undo self preservation-
If one lacks any desire to take care of themselves, that doesn't disqualify those who do have an urge to take care of their own needs. Pro does not have the burden to show that everyone will always be more inspired by the I rather than the You, only that I can be more inspiring than You. Although it has no direct bearing to his advocacy, Pro also wants to caution against disablist rhetoric when it comes to those who are unable or unwilling to satisfy their own biological needs. If this happens he has no qualms with kicking the topical debate in favor of a kritikal one.
The argument rests. Pro will expand in future rounds as necessary, but under the above framing and the two arguments provided I can be more inspirational than You. Self-preservation and boredom satisfaction show this to be the case, and instances of mental illness or You being more inspiring than I do not undermine the arguments.
You(Another) is more inspiring than I (the self).
A person could try to find inspiration within themself, digging down, and searching deep for what they need. Or...they could get it quickly from outside of themself by hearing someone else who is inspiring.
Let's do a test. Sit for a moment and try to inspire yourself.
Okay. Now watch this short video.
Which inspired you more? Yourself or the video? If you inspired yourself more, then "I" was more inspirational. If the video inspired you more, then you got more inspiration from another.
When one is down the self looks to another, and in some cases it might be their own mother.
The self gets weak, so it looks outside self. Santa Claus might look to an elf.
Self might get down and look to foods like cheez its. A Christian might look up and look up to Jesus.
There are things in this world that Con cannot know, so Con might try to get inspired by Pro. Pro might have all kinds of goodies all up in his brain, that if told to Con would keep Con sane. Inspiration givest me Pro. There's inspiration in you that I Con must know. You could be an angel sent down from Heaven. If you'd share with me, my IQ'd go up by eleven. Inspiration in thou Pro resides. From you Pro my gloom all subsides.
Con needs another for inspiration and strength. Others give it in droves of much breadth and length. We can muster it up on our own if we can. But how much time would we waste in that span?
It is not a reason to vote Con.
First, Con concedes the entirety of the Pro Framework. This means the analysis of can is a voting issue - Pro does not have to show that I will *always* be more inspiring than you, just that it Can be more inspiring than you. At the point con never contests this, he loses.
The self is motivated by the force that is within,
The burning inner fire that has surely always been.
Release your inhibitions - feel the rain on your skin!
To thine ownself be true rather than to your kin.
Oh pish, oh posh another loss, but what could be expected?
When one centers their motivations on the derelicted?
I'm not sure what Pro is talking about, so I am changing the debate topic. The name of this debate is "you choose the topic". Thus, I am changing the topic to "I'm in Your Brain and You Can't Get me Out".
I'm in Your Brain and You Can't Get me Out-
Num num num num num num num...
The Num Num Song-
I am in your head, and you can't get me out. You know you like it so don't make a pout. Break it down.
As a finale of this round, I will sing you this song to blow your mind...
First, this is a wildly unfair reading of the debate's parameters and any reasonable person would understand it to be a last-ditch effort to get the win.
Second, this is a dick move - that is a reason to vote Pro unto itself. Allowing that kind of reasoning degrades the activity and encourages future poor etiquette.
Finally, Even if you vote on Con's new topic none of the arguments presented affirm it.
So yeah, Con forfeits - it's an easy vote for Pro.
Pro made a format that was hard to follow. I then made an attempt to follow and Pro forfeits me. Thus, I am a victim of unfair conduct by Pro. And since it is so, to save the debate I showed you a good time.
Why should you vote Con?
1)Pro told you that you couldn't vote Con.(You can prove Pro wrong.)
2)Pro is trying to strongarm you into voting Pro. You don't have to take that kind of abuse.
3)Pro has done this exact debate many, many times. Here is an example debate of Pro attacking another opponent.
Pro used obscure wording and confounding rules to get an easy win in the debate.
a. If I can show that Youtube is better than Netflix on a consumer level, then the vote in this debate deserves to go to the Pro. Con could show that Netflix is more profitable, but that has no impact on consumers such as me or you. Your vote should be reflect which platform is better for you personally
b. This debate should be voted on-balance. The debater who best presents the advantages of their platform deserves the vote. If both platforms are shown to be equal, no vote should be cast.
In this debate Pro used the "F" word towards Con at the bottom of round 3. Con did not respond in the next round.
In this one Pro said, and I quote,
"All of the topics con offers are frankly awful. We are now arguing about coffee
And yet another. Ambiguous wording was used once again by Pro to attempt to get an easy win. Con dropped out from confusion of the rules and regulations or even what the topic "really" was.
The point? This is Pro's strategy. Pro doesn't want you to understand the format of the debate. This is Pro's attempt to get easy forfeit wins. I did not forfeit, thus, Pro is frustrated that I made an easily defined topic and format.
My way actually fit by definition of the name of this debate. "You Choose the Topic". I did, and Pro did not rebuttle. Pro scampered off into a bed of weeds. The end.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.