The Instigator
Max.Wallace
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Scaffold-Cane
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

Your kid is NOT "smarter" then you. Unless you believe smart phone savvy is smartness,

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 3 votes the winner is...
Scaffold-Cane
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/3/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 496 times Debate No: 62621
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)

 

Max.Wallace

Pro

The title says it all. Please dispute this, foolish parent.
Scaffold-Cane

Con

I will accept this debate. Would you mind providing a definition of 'smart' for context within this debate in your first argument? I will also assume that we are not talking about my child in specific (because you do not know my child and because my child does not yet exist), but rather children and parents to a more general degree. If you have any specific idea of 'child and parent', I would also like to know that for context as well.

I look forward to our first debate together, and my first debate on DDO!
Debate Round No. 1
Max.Wallace

Pro

The title says it lt all. You took it the BOP is you now.

Tell us why you kids with a smart phony are so smart. Their phony is their el braino? You will not turn this on me. Please further define why you took up this fight, acolyte of smart phoniness. Well then eh?
Scaffold-Cane

Con

I took this debate because I am interested in debating. In light of my opponent's lack of argument thus far, I will present a single argument and await my opponent's response.

Alright, I will begin. Let me begin by defining my terms and discussing the parameters of the debate. Burden of proof will be on me.

The discussion in this debate is whether or not a child is more intelligent than their parents, which I will assume refers to biological parents as guardians. I am unsure whether or not my opponent actually desires a causation between modern technologies (such as smart phones) and the likelihood of a parent to be less intelligent than their child. I will therefore assume that the initial assertion made by my opponent of 'Your kid is not smarter than you' is the assertion being debated.

The word 'smart' is often used interchangeably with the word 'intelligent'. There is an important distinction between these words, however, of which I'd like to make note. Being smart, as I will be discussing it, is the result learned inferences. [1] Intelligence is the natural ability of a person to learn and process. Which was meant by my opponent, I am unsure. I will use the word intelligent for simplicity's sake.

Tackling Intelligence - The Flynn Effect

Looking at intelligence first, we are strictly viewing the relationship of parents' intelligence and the intelligence of their children. The benefit of using intelligence as our measure of who is "smarter" in the context of this debate is that intelligence is something that has been standardized in the form of an IQ (or Intelligence Quotient) test. I will be using these tests to demonstrate that the tendency must be for children to be more intelligent than their parents.

There is a principle known as the Flynn Effect:

"The Flynn effect is the substantial increase in average scores on intelligence tests all over the world. When IQ tests are initially standardized using a standardization sample the average result is set to 100. By convention, the standard deviation of the results is set to 15 points. When IQ tests are revised they are again standardized using a new standardization sample and the average result set to 100. However, if the new sample is tested using older tests in almost every case they score substantially above 100."[2]

-Psychologists revise the test every couple years in order to maintain this numerical average. Almost invariably, new samples of test takers record average scores of well over 100 when administered an older version of the IQ test.[3]

I will choose an arbitrarily long period of time; 50 years. If people take an IQ test and score an average of 100 and then have children so that those children take an IQ test 50 years later, then by necessity they also average 100 on the IQ test, but by the Flynn Effect, those IQ scores are necessarily higher in context with the tests from 50 years prior to that. IQ tests are intended to have an average score of 100. Since the timescale is such that only parents were taking part in the first IQ tests and only their children would be taking part in the tests 50 years later, the children are necessarily more intelligent than their parents.

[1]http://www.differencebetween.net...
[2]http://www.princeton.edu...
[3]http://dujs.dartmouth.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
Max.Wallace

Pro

I will just touch on the obvious to me, which apparently is voodoo to you, but your is clearly more voodoo then what my observations are as you are a zombie maker in my mind.

You have zero debates.
even though you are debating this your count is zero.
That is a total fallacy as every debate I make is counted and as a newbie, your is neglected.
total fallacy of this site.
I cannot tell you how many times zeroes have debated me and won, but I will let you check if you are interested in the truth. More then thrice, I bet.

IQ 135, is me, and you?

Smart phony? How many now consult their brain phone to pass an IQ test? Me, never.

Whatever you say gladiator of technology, Rome will fall.
Scaffold-Cane

Con

I will abstain from posting further arguments since my opponent has decided to give me nothing to debate. I also call him out on a breach of appropriate conduct by asking me about my IQ (which I assure him is plenty high for me).
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Innerstrength 2 years ago
Innerstrength
Con would have got my vote but i am not eligble. Why do they want my phone number? it's not going to happen.
Posted by Scaffold-Cane 2 years ago
Scaffold-Cane
Yeah, it's quite a shame my first debate was a troll debate (or at the very least gave the impression).
Posted by Innerstrength 2 years ago
Innerstrength
I am rather new to DDO but it seems clear from the rounds debated so far and the comments that pro is not debating in the usual intellectual way but more like an 8 year old.
I wonder if you are in direct competition with your children and actually feel insecure about their intelligence? I work with children from 8-18 and have alot of interaction with the parents and have seen this type of thing before. I put to you that it would be more benficial for you and your child or children to embrace your childrens intelligence and help fill the holes that might be there from the obvious pitfalls of being over reliant on smart phones.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
This manipulator has convinced me my name chould be Max.Wallace.Able. Cane and able, here and now. Who kills who every time? Hang me on the scaffold, is that your plan?
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Your kid can point bomb, subsidized by confiscated dollars? What a hero he or she! Continue your argument here and now, or quit and raise a cow. So be it.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Are you another quitter? That is what the elites, Gates, Soros, Strong, Mao, and such wish. Be not such a fool please sir.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
You are most likely just another child parent fighting for your nipple. Clarify your argument to me sir. If you are seriously serious. Please.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
I dare you to teach your brat something your, or theirs, phone cannot. I DARE YOU! lol!
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Zanomi3 2 years ago
Zanomi3
Max.WallaceScaffold-CaneTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con, as several personal statements were presented by Pro. Spelling also goes to Con, only because I wasn't quite sure what Pro was saying in the majority of the debate. Convincing arguments is clear. More sources is also self-explanatory.
Vote Placed by FaustianJustice 2 years ago
FaustianJustice
Max.WallaceScaffold-CaneTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Poor Poor Poor presentation, Pro.
Vote Placed by Terridax 2 years ago
Terridax
Max.WallaceScaffold-CaneTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Unfortunately there's not much to say about this debate except that the Pro had very poor conduct, horrible spelling and grammar, and made no real arguements while using zero sources. The Con conducted themself very well, expecially for it being their first debate; they had good spelling and grammar, and nice structure; they made a good arguement while also using a source to back it.