is terrorism just another word for acts based on unjustified beliefs
Debate Rounds (5)
Good luck to my opponent! I'm hoping for an interesting debate.
I believe this is a classic case of, "All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares." Which is to say, I believe that terrorism is a subcategory of acts based on unjustified beliefs, but not a description of the whole group.
I'll explain this in practical terms. I'm Jewish, and so I pray thrice daily. This is an action which, atheists would believe, is unjustified, as it conforms in their minds to the definition of unjustified: "not shown to be right or reasonable." Would atheists call me a terrorist, just because I pray?
In short, terrorism is a subcategory, not a synonym, for acts based on unjustified beliefs.
1: The crusaders were terrorists. Everyone learns about their exploits in the Holy Land, not stopping to realize that they killed tens of thousands, maybe even more than one-hundred thousand, Jews who lived Europe. They also destroyed countless synagouges and burnt books of Jewish law. So, yes, the crusaders were terrorists, plain and simple.
2: I feel that you are backtracking. You, as pro, say that Terrorism and acts based on unjustified beliefs are synonymous. But then, you state that some acts based on unjustified beliefs aren't terrorism, as they cause no harm. I feel that your resolution is too broad for it to be embodied completely by your opinion.
3: Justification is in the eye of the beholder. You can't just use the word unjustified as objective.
Good luck in the next round.
Actually, your argument as defined by the statement is: "Terrorism just another word for acts based on unjustified beliefs."
Until now, I haven't really heard any proofs that these two phrases are synonymous. Rather, you've explained how we need to relabel terrorism, to say it like it is. I do believe that an act of terrorism is an act of unjustified belief, no matter who commits it. But not all acts of unjustified belief are terrorism.
I hope to read some interesting, on-topic arguments next round.
Secondly, ridiculousness is in the eye of the beholder.
And fiinally, our debate is about the title of the debate. But their are probably many sources you can find who argue your opinion, so all is not lost for you in this debate.
Good luck next round.
I know the title misrepresented what you meant. However, people vote based on the official opinions as defined by the title, not by the opinions stated thereafter.
I also hope people read this and understand our discussion. Voters, I want you to realize that Terrorism is only a sub-category of acts based on unjustified belief. I want you to realize that spelling and grammar are the icing to the cake, and the fact that my opponent clearly wrote arguments quickly on a mobile device doesn't display a recognition of that. And I want you to realize that the debate topic is what is voted upon, and a debater's change of opinion during the debate means that they have veritably given up on their original belief.
Thank You, and have a good night.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 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||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had terrible spleleleling. Con showed terrorism cannot be considered a synonym for unjustified beliefs, since it is a subset.
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.