The Instigator
LostintheEcho1498
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AlexanderOc
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

Your Pick

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 2 votes the winner is...
AlexanderOc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/27/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 495 times Debate No: 59606
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

LostintheEcho1498

Con

Round 1: Acceptance and topic
Round 2:Main argument
Round 3: Rebuttal
My idea here is that you can look at my main beliefs and find something that you disagree with me on and say which you wish to debate when you accept. Obviously it needs to be something I am con and you are pro. I hope for a healthy debate:)
AlexanderOc

Pro

I accept. In my opponent's profile he said that he hates trolls who mess with other people's debates just for fun.
I am going to agree with the resolution "Con hates trolls" while Con will disagree with that resolution.

Looking foreward to a fun debate!
Debate Round No. 1
LostintheEcho1498

Con

That is definitely not what I expected but I guess I will make lemonade.
I am going to make this quick.
1. I am LostinTheEcho1498.
2. I can decide how I feel about trolls.
3. I do not hate trolls.
4. No one can argue how I feel at this current moment unless they happen to be me, which they are not or they an read minds over the internet which is very unlikely.
I hope for...a good debate?kinda?
AlexanderOc

Pro

I. Cross-Examination
Con offered a small argument in round 2 for me to refute.

2. Con states here that he can decide how he feels about trolls. I.e. whether he hates them or not.
This however is completely incorrect. Pro is saying that he has control over his feelings towards other things. This is extremely unlikely considering almost no other human possesses this ability.
How one feels about another thing is not decided by that person, but instead by the mental complex of that person.
I never decided to hate rapists. It was just naturally the case that I did. The fact that I do is solely based on pre-conceived ideas as well as social influence paired together with the unique processing system in which I interpret information.

Whether an individual loves/hates something is not a choice, but rather a trait. So it is irrational to think my opponent can simply 'choose' to no longer hate trolls. On top of that, who's to say he isn't just lying to win this debate?

4. I've no intention of arguing how Con feels, but rather what he feels. I need not read his mind to know that he hates trolls.

II. Construct

It's actually quite simple to show that Con hates trolls. Just go to his profile. He clearly states that he hates them. Since we know that him hating trolls is a trait rather than a decision, we can be sure he was stating this as a way to communicate his feelings about trolls. This is also supported even more by the fact that this is in his "about me" section of his profile.

Another thing to note is that according to his profile, he updated this information 3 weeks before the time of this argument. Meaning that he had no bias of this debate. So it can be safely assumed that this information is true, whereas any recent statements are made with this debate in mind and could therefore influence my opponent's choice of what information to present.

III. Closing remarks

So, here is what we can conclude from my argument.

1. Con hating trolls is a trait, not a choice
2. Con cannot choose to not hate trolls
3. Con's profile says he hates trolls
4. Con's profile was updated before the bias of this debate
5. The information in Con's "about me" section is therefore most likely a correct representation of his feelings towards trolls

6. Con hates trolls.

IIII. Appendix

http://www.debate.org... (Con's Profile)

https://answers.yahoo.com... (How our brains decide what it likes and dislikes)

http://healthland.time.com... (Further reading into how our brains make choices)
Debate Round No. 2
LostintheEcho1498

Con

To begin, good way to argue and nice job. Now to rebuttal:
1.Nothing to refute.
2.". Con states here that he can decide how he feels about trolls. I.e. whether he hates them or not.
This however is completely incorrect. Pro is saying that he has control over his feelings towards other things. This is extremely unlikely considering almost no other human possesses this ability."
Notice that it says extremely unlikely. Not impossible. Plus the fact that one cannot understate the power of the human mind.
"Whether an individual loves/hates something is not a choice, but rather a trait. So it is irrational to think my opponent can simply 'choose' to no longer hate trolls. On top of that, who's to say he isn't just lying to win this debate?"
Whether or not you hate someone rather is a choice. You can choose to accept or reject or certain type of person. As for the lying, let me point out this. In the comments 9spaceking says, "lol pro is such a troll". So we can assume that the choice of topic that pro made was a troll choice. Now despite this choice I have not taken issue with this and am debating it, not raving for him being a troll.
3.(4)". I've no intention of arguing how Con feels, but rather what he feels. I need not read his mind to know that he hates trolls."
Rather or not he can tell I hate trolls is impossible as humans are given the ability of choice. I can choose to hate a man or forgive him and accept him anyway.
II. Construct:
"It's actually quite simple to show that Con hates trolls. Just go to his profile. He clearly states that he hates them. Since we know that him hating trolls is a trait rather than a decision, we can be sure he was stating this as a way to communicate his feelings about trolls. This is also supported even more by the fact that this is in his "about me" section of his profile.

Another thing to note is that according to his profile, he updated this information 3 weeks before the time of this argument. Meaning that he had no bias of this debate. So it can be safely assumed that this information is true, whereas any recent statements are made with this debate in mind and could therefore influence my opponent's choice of what information to present."
As for looking at my profile, you do have to remember that it is 3 weeks old and so not up to date with my personal ideas and so using something posted over a month ago is of little use as proof.
I thank you for a weird debate:)
AlexanderOc

Pro

I. Cross-Examination

"Notice that it says extremely unlikely. Not impossible. Plus the fact that one cannot understate the power of the human mind."

Unfortunately for my opponent, he has not proved that he falls within that range of unlikely possibility. Therefore we have to assume that his mental powers are in line with that of every other human being.
Also, it is quite simple to understate the power of the human mind. "The power of the human mind is very miniscule"

"Whether or not you hate someone rather is a choice. You can choose to accept or reject or certain type of person. As for the lying, let me point out this. In the comments 9spaceking says, "lol pro is such a troll". So we can assume that the choice of topic that pro made was a troll choice. Now despite this choice I have not taken issue with this and am debating it, not raving for him being a troll."

Accepting/rejecting someone and hating someone are 2 completelly different situations. It is possible to reject something you love of accept something you hate, the two are not intertwined. You cannot, however, choose what you love and hate. Those types of things are not chosen, but rather aquired.

As for the lying, Con has not given us any reason to trust that the bias of this debate isn't affecting his declaration of not hating trolls. Further in Con's statement, he says that despite me making a troll-like argument, he takes no issue with and demonstrates this by not raving me for being a troll. There are 2 problems here. First, Con could simply be lying again about not having an issue with my troll argument. Second, just because Con isn't raving on me for trolling does not strictly imply that he does not hate trolls like me. There is nothing saying that one must rave on everything they hate.

"Rather or not he can tell I hate trolls is impossible as humans are given the ability of choice. I can choose to hate a man or forgive him and accept him anyway. "

Once again, my opponent says that he can choose what he hates. His supporting reason however is still lacking.
It is not necesarily the case the one must either hate or forgive somebody. Both can happen is conjunction with eachother. Choosing to forgive somebody does not certainly mean that you no longer hate that person. Just as not forgiving somebody does not mean you completely hate that person.
How an individual acts towards a person and how they feel about that person are two seperate events where one does not always cause the other.
So you can choose to forgive a man, but that doesn't mean you also choose to not hate him.

"As for looking at my profile, you do have to remember that it is 3 weeks old and so not up to date with my personal ideas and so using something posted over a month ago is of little use as proof."

Evidence does not expire. My claim still stands. The profile made a month ago was not made with the influence of this debate so the information there can be more trustworthy than my opponent's current statements. If my opponent is indeed lying then he still hates trolls. The pre-biased statements on Con's profile tell us that he does and therefore it can be concluded as such.

II. Photographic Evidence








III. Conclusion

I feel that the above evidence is enough to fulfill my BoP. All of Con's refutations were rebutted.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
lol pro is such a troll
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Aerogant
Humans should never pick - they should think. Can't spell prick without pick!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
LostintheEcho1498AlexanderOcTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: pro manages to rebut every contention of con
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
LostintheEcho1498AlexanderOcTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Doxastic voluntarism is false.