balance is a higher level then truth, an ugly rich man is likely to get a female, and so dosnt have to be jealous of others or rape females
Initially, all must comprehend the configuration of speeches in this debate which the negation will present in chronological order:
Running-up would be a checklist of orders and modifications that are foretold to be comprehended in the carry-over of this debate:
And so, the negation will begin this debate round with an opening statement which will then be followed by an acceptance of this debate.
The negation clearly invalidates the resolution “[That] morality=[leads to] survival + [and] truth” (editing on the negations behalf to make the resolution easier to understand]. As Friedrich Nietzsche once stated, “Morality is the best of all devices for leading mankind by the nose”. For this reason, morality is shown as an etiquette that is governing all humanity in a negative aspect. Morality exists in all humans, but there is no specific need in a huge influence that is presented upon humans for this natural trait. All humans are known for noticing the ultimate difference between right and wrong, but this specifically is not always present in the life of an individual. Additionally, by analyzing the resolution one may interfere and prove that survival and truth do not necessarily come from morality in this world. Some people are not moral and ethical at all in there life and are still able to survive and tell the truth. Just because one individual is not morally correct in society’s eyes does not mean at all that they may not live or tell the truth for their whole life, or not their life due to lack of survival. Due to this, the negation will provide 5 strong contentions to support this claim. Firstly, all must understand the negative aspects that morality provides on humanity. Secondly, all must understand that morality is present in all human beings and is not needed in large amounts of influence on society. Thirdly, all must understand that survival and truth are not traits that are provided from morality. Fourthly, all must understand how the lack of morality and ethical behavior in many individuals is still present and does not mean they have a lack of survival and truth. Therefore, the framework in this debate is whoever in this debate does a better job at providing an ultimate understanding of morality and shows how society has an impact on morality that is not necessarily true to the resolution, shall win this debate.
The negation truly accepts this debate along with all arguments, exemplifications, contradictions, and it’s final outcome. The negation wishes the affirmation the dearest of luck and thanks for this great opportunity.
sure, keep in mind, survival=necessety=pain=death
Do you really think that my opponent is defending anything? My opponent fails to recognize the resolution, ultimately showing that I am providing excellent knowledge on the resolution.
Again, apologies for the delay and rush of this round. But again, this debate would come down to one person, me and only me the one that is actually providing argumentations. Thank you!
so far you have provided a truck load of BS
Firstly, I would like to point out how my opponent fails to understand that this debate rules as stated in the first round in which they responded "sure" is that there shall be no offensive terms but my opponent fails to see this. A failure to this shows ultimate disrespect towards me and the debate overall.
May I remind you all that my opponent has not provided any counterarguments only about 2 sentences that have ultimately proved nothing. Therefore, the only winner in this debate shall be the one that has provided the most solid arguments, meaning the negation.
Now, for defense, morality is a necessity but it does not mean it is survival and truth or even leads to it, survival and truth are in no way connected to morality. My opponent fails to provide concrete details to support the argument, proving me the winner.
This is why voters I ask you to vote for the side that is the most logical and strong, with good arguments and concrete details, which is the negation. Thank you!