The Instigator
ksnehu26
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points
The Contender
vishal_jadiya
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points

an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind

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 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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/31/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 16,677 times Debate No: 4849
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (8)

 

ksnehu26

Con

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind". Gandhi quote. The father of non-
violent resistance in the modern age, Mahatma Gandhi led a peaceful revolt that won
India's independence from British colonial rule. His message of non-violent resistance is
as timely today as it was 50 years ago. Red and black on gold 100% cotton, pre-shrunk
t-shirt.When someone commits a heinous crime, such as murder, he or she is usually sentenced to death. This is known as capital punishment or the death penalty. The death penalty has always been a very controversial subject. Even in the Bible there is no side to capital punishment. Adam and Eve's sons were Cain and Abel. Each son had brought a sacrifice to God. God accepted Abel's, but rejected Cain's. Cain was so angry with his brother that he killed him. God then put a curse on Cain and sent him to wander the earth. He also put a mark on Cain's body so that no one would be tempted to kill Cain for killing his brother. If anyone killed Cain for killing Abel, they would be more severely punished than Cain was by God. Exodus 21:15 states, "Whoever strikes a man a mortal blow must be put to death." However, Luke 6:36-38 states, " Be compassionate as your Father is compassionate. Do not judge, and you will not be judged.
vishal_jadiya

Pro

no its not good because if every person if thinks about it than what happens .if someone by fault kick u then uwill again in return kick him
Debate Round No. 1
ksnehu26

Con

It was pointed out to me day-before-yesterday by Paula that the I-Ching was written in times as troubled as these, and the framework for the discussion it invites was similar.

But I still see this as the first skirmish in a war between ancient and modern memes. Between the global infection of shopping-mall America and the ancient memes still reflected by some of the people who have apparently found it necessary to take a "religious" stand against it. And these are very different memes than the ones that infect the kids protesting WTO, or Earthfirst! cutting down power transmission towers to a uranium refinery, and yet the symbols and the targets are exactly the same and the reasons they are targets are the same.

It almost comes down to asking people to stand up and be counted - O.K. folks -who is infected by which meme?
Who is willing to die for which cause?
Whose meme allows them to enter into alliances with whom?
If the numbers are big enough, even the stupidest leaders should be prepared to back down ...
unless they are operating in a largely delusional world created by their meme infection.

So, before I can pretend to understand what is going on, or going to happen, I feel like I "need" to see a demographic map - a histogram display that gives a clear indication of the % of total population in each country in the world that subscribe to what might be called "fundamentalist" religious views - where a significant number of people are willing to die as saints or martyrs for their religious beliefs. I see this as a critical map.

It occurred to me yesterday that the state of war, or the definition of warfare, could be as simple as a temporary suspension of our ethics, of the normal rules under which a society operates, and a shift to a model based on the premise that the glorious ends will justify the horrible means.

The greatest beauty (and horrible and beauty are not oxymoronic, if the ends justify the means) of the terrorist's exercise at the WTC was the web of connectedness it revealed. Even beyond showing that strategic missile defense and most of the Pentagon's budget was absurd - both obsolete and unnecessary and ineffective - if all you needed was box knives to use any existing scheduled public transport device - be it a bus, an airplane, or a ship - as a weapon as effective any ICBM, it clearly showed us that nearly everyone in America was connected to someone who was injured or killed. And from that lesson we can project a consequence of retaliation that radiates out from that center, be it Afghanistan or Pakistan or anywhere, and imagine/realize that every death we cause in our misguided attempt at revenge surely creates hundreds or thousands of new enemies.

Hence Ghandi's line: "An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind."

By the way: a "meme" is a word virus - not a word macrovirus like people send over the internet, but a communicable disease transmitted through human language or human behavior. Dawkins would perhaps take issue with "darkness" implicit in the disease model, but I believe it provides a better, broader fit than his gene-like model. Our immune system grows from it's experience and exposure to viruses, just as our understanding of the world, and our collection of filters that prevent us from experiencing the world, are acquired from experience.

There is little or no evidence that I have encountered that resistance to specific infections is acquired through experience and passed to subsequent generations through genes. Typically meme infections have sets of symptoms, hence I believe that a meme creates a sort of identifiable pattern of altered responses in infected individuals: a syndrome. "Jesus Christ as personal savior" is a meme. So are "sainthood" and "martyrdom". And "good and evil". And the Bill of Rights.

Richard Dawkins (who I once believed coined the term) says: Examples of memes are tunes, ideas, catch-phrases, clothes fashions, ways of making pots or of building arches. Just as genes propagate themselves in the gene pool by leading from body to body via sperm or eggs, so memes propagate themselves in the meme pool by leaping from brain to brain via a process which, in the broad sense, can be called imitation. If a scientist hears, or reads about, a good idea, he passes it on to his colleagues and students. He mentions it in his articles and his lectures. If the idea catches on, it can be said to propagate itself, spreading from brain to brain.
Memes should be regarded as living structures, not just metaphorically but technically. When you plant a fertile meme in my mind, you literally parasitize my brain, turning it into a vehicle for the meme's propagation in just the way that a virus may parasitize the genetic mechanism of a host cell. And this isn't just a way of talking -- the meme for, say, 'belief in life after death' is actually realized physically, millions of times over, as a structure in the nervous systems of people all over the world.

So, I initially assumed that people who did not know the word meme would either discover its meaning from the context I had developed around the word, or Google it. Googling meme history gets you: http://en.wikipedia.org... which offers (in part):
"Considerable controversy surrounds the term "meme" and its associated discipline, memetics. In part this arises because a number of possible (though not mutually exclusive) interpretations of the nature of the concept have arisen:
1.The least controversial claim suggests that memes provide a useful philosophical perspective with which to examine cultural evolution. Proponents of this view argue that considering cultural developments from a meme's eye view — as if memes act to maximise their own replication and survival — can lead to useful insights and yield valuable predictions into how culture develops over time. Dawkins himself seems to have favoured this approach.
2.Other theorists have focused on the need to provide an empirical grounding for memetics in order for it to class as a real and useful scientific discipline. Given the nebulous (and in many cases subjective) nature of many memes, providing such an empirical grounding has to date proved challenging.
3.A third approach, exemplified by Dennett and by Susan Blackmore in her book The Meme Machine (1999), seeks to place memes at the centre of a radical and counter-intuitive naturalistic theory of mind and of personal identity. "
vishal_jadiya

Pro

vishal_jadiya forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
ksnehu26

Con

ksnehu26 forfeited this round.
vishal_jadiya

Pro

vishal_jadiya forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
I have to agree with Zerosmelt there, on both accounts. I am curious what kind of ethics you yourself live by, ksnehu. What would you have me do in various life-threatening scenarios? Tit-for-tat is the only system that works in the real world, no matter how idealistic your aspirations might be. And trust me, that's saying something coming from me.

Britt
Posted by Zerosmelt 9 years ago
Zerosmelt
ksnehu26 you are obviously going to win this debate and i basically completely agree with you. its just one thing... (and i can't help myself here.)

"Death Sentence is against the will of nature. No one reserves the right to take away anyone's life. "

-what??? this statement couldn't be more false.
If the death sentence is against the will of nature then what does a kitten do everytime it catches a mouse? There is a great book you should read about this called, "On the Origins of Species." and its predecessor (imho) "The Selfish Gene"

This may not make you feel very good but the fact is that you only exist because your ancestors were ruthless murderers and thieves. Everyhuman and everybeing alive today has this legacy. that's just the way reality works. We evolved from molecular replicators. The first generation of molecular replicators simply copied themselves, the second generation torn apart the first generation to use its resources to copy itself. An act of bloody murder and thievery. Everything alive today evolved from the first and then the second generation. When you eat an apple you are doing the same thing our second generation molecular replicating ancestors did. You're tearing apart the molecules of a species, killing it to get to its resources.
Molecules do, organisms do it, animals do it, nations do it. Its definitely natural.... but things are getting better every day... violence, murder and death are spirally way down, puck posted this a few days ago... give it a look see.
http://www.ted.com...
Posted by ksnehu26 9 years ago
ksnehu26
Death Sentence is against the will of nature. No one reserves the right to take away anyone's life.

Saddam Hussein Convicted for :
Murdering 148 Shia Iraqis

George W. Bush Iraq war Death Toll :
Innocent Civilians: 41,744 to 46,668
Army : 2,578

AND RISING !

Now who is going to hang George W. Bush ???

Who???????

Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk...
http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime
- Ernest Hemingway

God Save the World...

Prayer For Peace

Oh Lord, make me an instrument of your peace
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy;

O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.

No... am not acutely religious or anything... These are the prayers i recited for 14 years every morning through my school life... it made no absolutely no sense then... but it is totally relevant in todays world...

Because... As Mahatma Gandhi said... An eye for an eye will make the whole world go blind...

Peace starts with a smile...

So Smile today and make someone's day :)
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by debate.unique 9 years ago
debate.unique
ksnehu26vishal_jadiyaTied
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 
Vote Placed by abhimanyu 9 years ago
abhimanyu
ksnehu26vishal_jadiyaTied
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 
Vote Placed by mjoveny 9 years ago
mjoveny
ksnehu26vishal_jadiyaTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by brettbond123 9 years ago
brettbond123
ksnehu26vishal_jadiyaTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Cooperman88 9 years ago
Cooperman88
ksnehu26vishal_jadiyaTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by CP 9 years ago
CP
ksnehu26vishal_jadiyaTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Zerosmelt 9 years ago
Zerosmelt
ksnehu26vishal_jadiyaTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Who 9 years ago
Who
ksnehu26vishal_jadiyaTied
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:30