Debate Rounds (5)
i must know i can die to be afraid to jump of a cliff
i am alive so i can die
"i must know i can die to be afraid to jump of a cliff"
Unsubstantiated and untrue. The fear of falling is very likely to be non-associative (1 - 3).
Pro's general position is incorrect as well. The conditioning model (most similar popular model to Pro's position that I could find) of the origin of fear acquisition is not supported by data - to the contrary, the non-associative model is favored instead (4 - 6)
Definitely - second study showed that infants (who have no knowledge of what death is) are still afraid to go near edges with sizeable drops.
a baby is only aware of pain if it has the contrast of memory of joy
without plus and minus there is no balancing point between them, without a match and the match burning there is no light of the match burning
ok.. you just took a drug that wipes your understanding of pain and death, but you are afraid to jump of a cliff, what is stopping you? or making you afraid
"a baby is only aware of pain if it has the contrast of memory of joy"
Source? And even if this point were right, it wouldn't support your position in the debate (as the discussion is about the cause of fear, not pain or how it functions).
"ok.. you just took a drug that wipes your understanding of pain and death, but you are afraid to jump of a cliff, what is stopping you? "
I left a bunch of studies in the previous round that answer exactly that.
pain is the source of fear
"everything has an opposite for it to exist"
Asserted without reasoning, evidence, or argument.
"pain is the source of fear"
Data provided says otherwise.
the data is wrong, unless you know its true, if you know its true that means you can explain it to me right now like you can describe a flower on your computer table
"the data is wrong,"
"if you know its true that means you can explain it to me right now "
Pro is shifting the burden of proof.
The available data contradicts Pro's stance, who only responded via fallacious means. Vote Con.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by boognish 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: S&G to Con for using actual sentences, punctuation, and capitalization. Only Con used sources. Pro did not refute Con's argument that babies show fear of falling with no prior experience to substantiate such fear.
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.