The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

right+intent=morality

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/16/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,172 times Debate No: 78740
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (16)
Votes (1)

 

vi_spex

Pro

being entirely evil, like hypothetically 100 percent evil, there is no right thing i can do, i cant tell you an answer to a question you have, because logically that is the answer to your question

morality is guided by objective so even thou subjective still absolute, like 1+1
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

i dont feel sure, you joining is 1 thing but that statement dosnt seam like much more proof
Mikal

Con

Right intent =/= morality

Choices + ethics - determination = morality

Morality is love, morality is choices. It's not intent or right, but choices that blend with ethics / square root of love x the power of ethical distribution within society .
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

so i have to love some one to be moral to them?

love is unknown

without right, or intent, morality can not exist

deadly poisonous mushroom=immoral to give to my starving kid
healthy apple=moral to give to my starving kid

like a default, morality is determined by cause and effect
Mikal

Con

right by definition is the concept of being true, morality is not true nor can it be right but rather subjective to perception and intent depending on ethical relativity in society which is at best relative to personal opinion. You have to love to feel and to make your ethics, so morality cannot be right but is undeniably defined by choices and ethics which people love or theywould not commit

Morality cannot be defined as right + intent because morality is polar opposite from being right becasue right is based on perception and morality cannot be right because it is always subjective

Ethics + choices = morality

Ill eat your mushroom and spit out unicorn rainbows
Debate Round No. 3
vi_spex

Pro

being true is not a concept, concepts are not real

right and wrong are reasoning.. mostly based on objective

is math wrong becasue its subjective?

your problem beyond not having adreassed my equation which makes you not a con and unable to win is that you do not need ethics to be moral.. netiher do you need love
Mikal

Con

as you say, right is based on the principal of being objective which is inherently correct.

You cannot reason and be objective but subjective which is perception, not being inherently right. Morality cannot be defined as right+ intent because one cannot be right as right is open to change which is defined by ethical and cultural standards / square root and power of Popsicle

Jesus can move a stone with his mind, so he is objectively right by perceptions in culture in context to the poison mushroom
Debate Round No. 4
vi_spex

Pro

right=right

if right can not exist morality can not exist

right=logical=knowledge

and there is still absolutes of the mind, only fantasy has no logic in it, imagination

i have to imagine Jesus, Jesus might be nothing but a story, subjective. which i know he is.. but different debate
Mikal

Con

the resolution is inherently flawed. right =/= right. There is no right, what we know is right is always open to change .We may think the sun is bright, but that could change. Nothing is iron clan facts, as facts can always change with more observations and evidence so we know as right now is actually subjective. Morality is not right because it's based on choices which no choice is ever a right choice

The entire debate is right + intent = morality. You have to show how that formula is true

not to mention you cant add words

well

maybe but not in that sense

https://www.google.com...
Debate Round No. 5
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
i can add words..
Posted by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
"You can't add words". I'm still laughing!
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
knowledge is never illogical, knowledge is memory
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
truth is unchanging, memories are never illogical
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
mikal if you need me to clarify my equation or make an argument just say so
Posted by Rami 1 year ago
Rami
It's not certain if it's real though:
http://www.debate.org...
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
lol101
Yup.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
yo man

love the tox xD
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
i mean i can run on the street and bump into you accidentally for eksample, but on the other hand if i was shouting GET DOWN YOU BASTARD and ramming your pusposefully you might view me in a more immoral way
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
lol101
I knew vi would return.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Emilrose 1 year ago
Emilrose
vi_spexMikalTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to affirm his resolution and *show* how 'right+intent=morality'. Instead, he spoke purely from subjective opinion and only offered a few small sentences of argument. While pro elaborated a little more and argued how morality necessarily about 'right' and 'wrong' and that it is essentially subjective. He also highlighted how the resolution is, in fact, inherantly flawed.