if jarvisEt wanted ultron dead he would also want the avengers dead
Debate Rounds (5)
I don't understand how you came to the conclusion that Jarvis would want the Avengers dead if he wanted Ultron dead. Both the Avengers and Jarvis wanted Ultron dead (they share a common enemy). According to your logic if the Avengers want Ultron dead then they should want themselves dead and that is extremely unlikely.
Here is a list of reasons why Jarvis does not want the Avengers dead.
Jarvis became vision and helped to defeat Ultron. He had the opportunity to fight with the Avengers and potentially kill some of them but he didn't because he is made up of artificial intelligence he can reason and acknowledge the difference between right and wrong.
Vision was what Ultron was supposed to be. A protector of the planet who would assist the Avengers not kill them as Pro is trying to say. Vision was good!
"Almost immediately, the Vision rebelled against his creator and joined the Avengers. He become a distinguished member of the Earth's mightiest heroes"
jarvis wanted to change ultron not kill him, thats why he is worty to wield the power of thors hammer, he is not a killer, also because if he did want to kill ultron, ultimately he would have to kill himself.
i am talking about vision, not jarvis.. in any case, he said himself that he is not a son of ultron and he is not jarvis, but more.. so jarvisEt ye
i am not saying vision wants the avengers dead.. why do people keep misunderstanding this...
if the moon is made of cheese, a tiny stone will drop on your head as your read this last Word
"The Vision is a [type of] android, a sentient machine.. There has already been precedent in the Marvel Universe for androids, who are NOT alive, to be able to pick up Thor's hammer. This loophole does not allow them to wield any of its powers, however, since the hammer essentially does not register them at all. Picking up Mjolnir and wielding its powers are two different things!"
Pro says: "I am not saying Vision wants the Avengers dead.. Why do people keep misunderstanding this..." Pro hasn't stated what he is saying so until he does I will continue to argue my own interpretation of this debate.
Pro ends his argument with a strange line that makes very little sense to me.
Before I cite the sources I would like to point out that spelling and grammar should go to me since Pro has failed to use capital letters throughout most of his argument.
hm, so the elevator is not worthy even thou it can lift the hammer, because it cant wield the power maybe
vision can still be worthy thou, but not really because he is dead
b) Ultron did not do what they thought he would do. He did not represent their moral views.
c) Vision can still be worthy but he isn't. We would know if he was because then he would have been able to use its powers.
The elevator is not worthy and since the elevator is not living it cannot be worthy. Being a non-living object it is able to hold Thor's hammer - like a table and a chair could hold his hammer.
I'm not sure if I understand your very last sentence. From my understanding of this statement you are claiming that Vision is dead. Just because he is a class of Android it doesn't change the fact that he is living and has consciousness. You have failed to provide any new arguments that actually provide any relevance to this debate.
b) ultron was programmed by stark
c) yes, but vision can be worthy, according to morality, not being a killer even thou he can not wield the power of the hammer, and also, vision wanted to change ultron not kill him, but ended up killing him in self defence, which is moral
i thought you said the android was not alive, is vision alive or dead?
b) Exactly but Ultron hates Tony Stark. This shows that they have opposing views. Due to the fact that AI was used Ultron developed a personality and learnt to form his own opinions.
c) Vision can be worthy but at the time where he lifted the hammer he was not. He was unable to use the full power that Thor's hammer possessed.
I said that an android is not alive but Vision is a class of android (a synthezoid). This class of android is an exception. Regular Androids are not technically alive but certain classes are. This is also irrelevant to the debate so I wont go into too much detail.
Pro hasn't really provided any arguments that make sense. The arguments that made any sense were refuted by me.
Conduct - Tied
Convincing Argument - Me
Spelling and Grammar - Me
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by hellywon 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||3|
Reasons for voting decision: We see lack of argumentation of Pro
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.