The Instigator
dhaka
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
Biowza
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points

an eye for an eye will make 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: 7/12/2008 Category: Sports
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,118 times Debate No: 4669
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (8)

 

dhaka

Con

It is necessary to reply/act against any wrong doing. This will ensure purification of the society in the long run
Biowza

Pro

Well I think you need to define what you mean by 'eye for an eye' if you refer to 'acting against wrong doing' as you say, that is not the eye for an eye mentality as I see it. It is possible, and often better to act against wrong doing, except not in a manner that is equal or greater than the original wrong doing.

By this logic, the person you have punished has a right to punish you equally in return, so on and so forth until everyone loses. I'm not advocating doing nothing when someone wrongs you, but to do the exact same thing to them just lowers you to their level and hurts you both so no-one wins. Certainly it doesn't purify anything.

You assumptions of 'purification in the long run' assumes that one side will eventually give up this mentality, however if you are to truly adhere to this 'eye for an eye' idea, then it would not simply end. An example:

-Someone trips, pokes you in the eye. You immediatly see this is wrong doing against you so you poke him in the eye. He is angry because it was an accident and kicks you in the leg, you get angry and kick him in the leg. Et Cetera.

Sorry if this is a crummy response, I've had a bit to drink. At least I have written more than my opponent.
Debate Round No. 1
dhaka

Con

dhaka forfeited this round.
Biowza

Pro

Well since my opponent has forfeited the last round, I sadly have nothing to respond to, so I'll just expand on some of my points.

The 'eye for an eye' logic, has a serious problem in that if the initial person's act of "wrong doing" was either an accident or perceived to be justified in and of itself, then the "retribution" can proceed indefinitely until both parties are severely hurt. This is a fundamental flaw in this logic. It assumes that one party will recognise their own "wrong doing" and just stop their own retribution. When in fact, from their point of view, they are the ones that have been wronged.

These facts may be difficult to see, when the most prevalent example of the eye for an eye mentality in modern society is the death penalty. But think this way, what if you execute an innocent man? Following the eye for an eye logic, he has right or even a duty to have everyone involved in his murder executed as well. Obviously he cannot kill, but if we form a society on this mentality as you seem to be suggesting then the state must step in and have everyone involved executed. Then the people's families would feel that they have been wronged, and they would have to act against the state. So on and so forth.

The idea of eye for an eye is not justice, justice is had every day without the need for an equal offense carried out against the perpetrator. The concept of eye for an eye just creates huge social and legal problems and does nothing but harm.
Debate Round No. 2
dhaka

Con

dhaka forfeited this round.
Biowza

Pro

My opponent has posted a mere two sentences in this debate. I have rebutted his arguements and presented my own, of which, none have been answered or even addressed. It should be clear that a vote for PRO is the only option.

On behalf of my opponent I apologise for wasting people's time.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by knick-knack 8 years ago
knick-knack
You spelled the word apologize wrong in your last response. you spelled it apologise not apologize. just thought you'd like to know.
Posted by CiRrO 8 years ago
CiRrO
Lol, I just had a debate like this. ^^ Except I was Con.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by indianajones644 8 years ago
indianajones644
dhakaBiowzaTied
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 kailas_menaria123 8 years ago
kailas_menaria123
dhakaBiowzaTied
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 Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
dhakaBiowzaTied
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 DanDebates 8 years ago
DanDebates
dhakaBiowzaTied
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 Killer542 8 years ago
Killer542
dhakaBiowzaTied
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 Puck 8 years ago
Puck
dhakaBiowzaTied
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 brittwaller 8 years ago
brittwaller
dhakaBiowzaTied
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 Biowza 8 years ago
Biowza
dhakaBiowzaTied
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