The Instigator
vrinda
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
Sniperjake1994
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

wity fool is better than a foolish wit

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/12/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 9,036 times Debate No: 8600
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

vrinda

Pro

what is the use of such wits when one becomes foolish at the time when they are actually needed On the other hand , a fool , who is deficient in judgement , sense or understanding deceives other person by his jest .
Sniperjake1994

Con

I negate the resolution: wity fool is better than a foolish wit.

Definitions from Oxford Dictionary:
Wit-mental sharpness and inventiveness; keen intelligence.
Fool-a person who acts unwisely or imprudently; an arrogant person.
Better-more appropriate, advantageous, or well advised.
Foolish-lacking good sense or judgment.

Observations:
1. I assume my opponent word "wity" means wit used as an adjective. Debate.org has a "check your spelling link," yet Vrinda's case fails to provide any explanation or definition for the word he used, therefore we will use this observation.
2. Please note the word "a foolish wit." It can be said to only occur once because of "a".
3. A simpler meaning for wity fool: A silly person who has the potential of being smart but doesn't use it.
4. A simpler meaning for foolish wit: a mentally unintelligent action taken.
5. My opponent has provided no explanations for the resolution so I assume both teams will resort Con's Observations.

NC:

1. A man who has the potential wits yet never uses it makes the wits worthless. For example a lucky and stingy man wins 5 million dollars and decides to keep in a safety box at home as a souvenir and/or for bragging rights. So what, where will that lead him to if he doesn't invest it or spend it? No where, except trouble when he's mugged or killed. Analysis: 5 mill represents potential wits he never uses. The man represents the silly fool. Wits are worthless if they aren't used.
A foolish wit creates one problem, yet a clever and clean cover up can simply bury that one mistake. Therefore he ends up on a clean slate and the foolish wit has no impact to his situation.

2. Taking action is better than no action. A foolish wit is classified as an action that contains the possibility to work because when a wit has only two outcomes, foolish and successful. A wity fool just stands there without using what he has, he just allows it to happen. For example: If the U.S government knew an asteroid will collide with the earth in 6 days and the only promising action that will stop it from colliding is by sending a nuclear missile to break it into much smaller pieces so as they fall into earth the majority would simply burn before they hit the ground, thus it causes little or no catastrophe. Or they could just wait and do nothing. The government has all the equipments and resources ready to evade the disaster, yet will it just stand there and wait for their doom or do everything they can to stop it? I pretty sure if the government won't then the people will urge and force the government to take an action to prevent their doom. Through this example, I have shown action is better than no action and using a foolish wit is better than just standing there and letting it happen like a wity fool.

3. A foolish wit can be taken as a life lesson just like Aesop's fables. But a wity fool can never learn from his mistakes because he is arrogant and filled up like a cup filled with water. "How can you learn more if your wine cup's already full?-Master Jason Kim. Bottom line: you CAN LEARN from a foolish wit. (It could also aid you in some scenarios.)

4. Foolishness can later be seen as a good option. For example: Women having equal rights as me seemed ridiculous before. As time passed look where we ended up, step further into achieving democracy by allowing women to vote. The world know has seen the impacts women can create such as major scientific discoveries to aiding soldiers in war. In a similar way such foolish wits can later be seen as a success rather than regret.

Attacking Pro:

1. "what is the use of such wits when one becomes foolish at the time when they are actually needed"

R: Note the phrase "one become foolish" refers to a fool, not a foolish wit. I assume my opponent tries to express: what's the use of foolish wits if a fool really needs to use it. Huh? Well I hope to clear it up by combining my contention 2 & 4 (action is better than no action) and my opponents' idea=if a fool will use a foolish wit that has the possibility of either saving him or killing him. This concludes in saying a foolish wit has a 50% chance to save a life. So obviously foolish wits can successfully save people.

2. "a fool , who is deficient in judgement , sense or understanding deceives other person by his jest."

R: I don't see how this is better than a foolish wit. How can a fool, lacking any sense of understanding and judgement, can deceive another by his amusements? He ought to be tricked himself. Deceiving requires wits, both foolish and successful, to cloak his intent (For example if you usually flunk tests and happen to have a genius sitting next to and during one really tough test and both of you aced a perfect score, wouldn't the teacher be curious about cheating?); judgement on who to trick; and understanding how to squeeze the most out of his time. A fool has none of these and cannot comprehend the situation, thus he cannot fall into the category of deceiving anyone. A fool needs foolish wits in order to conceal his scheme. Therefore foolish wits are better than a wity fool.

In conclusion for the reasons and refutals above please vote con. I look forward towards Pro's response. Thank you for reading this lengthy argument.
Debate Round No. 1
vrinda

Pro

well so as to correct my so called witty opponent,
one doesn't need a dictionary meaning of the words rather a better understanding to let penetrate a dictum into one's brains.
no doubt con has very correctly defined all the words used in the debating topic which is a cliched thing .
so if he loves correcting mistakes,let his this prowess should augment by knowing that ,
i have intentionally used wity instead of witty so as to highlight the acumen of witty fool who is wity but not witty but trying to be witty.
well ,forget it it would seem to you as bombardment,afterall you require lengthy ...................
okay if you answer me this simple question i'll accept you as a winner of this debate
be honest enough
who is in a better position -a half witted person,a`witless person or a witty person
Sniperjake1994

Con

Thank you Pro for such a quick response.

My opponent has agreed on the definitions I have posted, thus we will apply them to this debate. I understand my definitions seem very unoriginal but that's what the Oxford dictionary states.
It is very difficult to reword several phrases in the resolution because very few words show the exact meaning, thus I resolved to using the same phrase repeatedly. So I apologize for this coincidence.
If any of the voters has done high school NFL policy debate I suppose you knew the crucial skill of seeking flaws on evidence. I wish to sharpen these skills online before the next debate season begins.

Attacking Pro's refutals:
Definition:
witty- showing or characterized by quick and inventive verbal humor

1. "i have intentionally used wity instead of witty so as to highlight the acumen of witty fool who is wity but not witty but trying to be witty." Please elaborate, I need some explanations for the last few words. Bottom line: is the guy witty?

2. Now as for his challenge: who is in a better position -a half witted person,a`witless person or a witty person?
First Pro takes up the entire debating ground, thus leaving little or none for Con to debate on because there most options lead to a witty fool.
Second this question simply has no direct link regarding being better than a foolish wit, thus it has no relevance to the topic and cannot be considered as a major voting issue.
Third if I committed a foolish wit then I would had directly answered it, using one of the three choices, without knowing it's an unfair trap (reasoned above). He has posted this question and fails to conceal its intention. Either way from the looks my opponent's refutal and my case, if I had done a foolish wit and responded using one of his options then my lengthy reasoning would had cover up the hole(links to NC Contention 1). Bottom line is: Foolish wits can always be covered up cleverly but a witty fool fails cover his intentions.

Voting issues:
1. None of Con's challenges have not been answered.
2. I have listed my reasons above in round 1 and 2, I have proven that a foolish wit is better than a witty fool.
3. A witty fool is a funny idiot. A foolish wit can be used as a valuable lesson. For example: What do we learn from Ber Rabbit's victims such as Ber Fox, etc? Which one is more valuable?
4. I have completely attacked my opponent's case. Pro's case falls and Con's still stands.

In conclusion for the reasons listed please vote Con. I apologize for such a longer response than Pro. Thank you and I look forward towards Pro's refutations.
Debate Round No. 2
vrinda

Pro

there's no point in comparing br'er fox with witty fool
he always used to lost because of his wicked intentions,he was not a fool but transformed himself into a fool courtesy his corrupted objectives
my opponent says a foolish wit can cover up his mistake
well here's the solution lies - a wit will do everything in a flawless manner but once he commits mistake he'll be termed as an foolish wit because he'll never be able to correct it
thinking that he is right.
accepted that he'll use his best of the best brains in order to disguise it but he does not know the witty fool sitting in front of him is more intelligent that he has been revealed everything despite foolish wit's conceals
okay , tell me does a wise person(witty fool) ever flaunts his knowledge???????
on the other hand an ostentatious person(foolish wit) always flaunts his so called acumen and is very good at blowing off his own trumpet .
take a practical example who is in a better position X who always take part in class discussion plus carries a good impression on all the teachers or Y who actually proves himself by scoring in exams

therfore , foolish wit means a person who is witty in the eyes of outsiders but in fact is a foolish person
like in that old tale of hare and tortoise,hare being intelligent in racing but proved to be a fool int he end.

while witty fool is a person like tortoise who never exposed his acumen
brer rabbit is a perfect example of this category
hence verified
WITY FOOL IS BETTER THAN A FOOLISH WIT
Sniperjake1994

Con

Thanks for the refutation, it was a pleasure debating you. As a road map for voters, I will attack pro's refutations than go on to voting issues.

1. Br'er fox's example is to the topic, therefore it is relevant. My opponent states:",he was not a fool but transformed himself into a fool courtesy his corrupted objectives." This sentence contradicts himself because in the end Br'er fox committed a foolish wit and it taught us that some people don't really help, they just get in the way and rob you. (Example: Some pickpockets don't really help you pick up things, they steal stuff)

2. "a wit will do everything in a flawless manner but once he commits mistake he'll be termed as an foolish wit because he'll never be able to correct it
thinking that he is right." My opponent has combined the two ideas of a witty fool and a foolish wit together therefore I will try to separate the two.

"an foolish wit because he'll never be able to correct it." I believe I described in my contention 3 that a wit can be learned from thus reforming the flawed wit into a wise one. It's similar to disciplining a naughty student into a well behaved one. Therefore the word "never" cannot apply here because a wit is able to fix itself and a foolish wit can also be learned from thus it is better. This argument cannot stand because of the reason above.

"thinking that he is right." A witty fool on the other hand cannot change because he is arrogant. If he could and reformed himself then he loses the qualifications of a witty person, thus this argument doesn't stand.

3. "okay , tell me does a wise person(witty fool) ever flaunts his knowledge???????
on the other hand an ostentatious person(foolish wit) always flaunts his so called acumen and is very good at blowing off his own trumpet ."

Well, according to my definitions a wise guy (fool) does flaunt his knowledge because he's a fool and he is arrogant (cross apply this to my definition of fool). Arrogance (having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities) is a qualification for the fool to blow off his trumpet. Therefore a wise guy (witty fool) does flaunts his knowledge. My opponent isn't a witty fool he claims o be.

Your insult is also clearly foul. Still, I will continue debate this cruel opponent rather than posting foul words about her profile. I'm used to debating formally because I'm on my school's speech & debate team, so I can't just get angry and explode with random arguments. I'm not a foolish wit but an ostentatious person.
A foolish wit, please remember the word "foolish." A foolish person will mute himself realizing he's close to becoming an idiot and doesn't wish to progress further into making himself a witty fool. A foolish wit is more important than a witty fool because that foolish wit is to signal a person to realize he's on the borderline to become a witty fool. An example taken above was Br'er fox, by opponent stated ",he was not a fool but transformed himself into a fool,"she agrees that there is a line between foolish wit and witty fool through the word "transformed."

4. The hare and the tortoise story is a very interesting example, very well thought out. "hare being intelligent in racing but proved to be a fool int he end." This explanation supports my argument above regarding the borderline between foolish wit and witty fool. The hare committed a foolish wit first than became a witty fool. My opponent therefore supports that foolish wit comes first, then a witty fool. She has lost this argument.
And in several interpretations there is an extension to the story, a part two. In part 2 the hare learns from his mistake, re-challenges the tortoise, and finishes first without stopping. All the animals congratulate the hare including the tortoise. This 2nd part of the fable also supports my argument saying a foolish wit can be learned from.

If my opponent never exposed her acumen than there's no need to post again and she wouldn't had been so pettish in debate.

All of my contentions and refutals stand so vote Con.

Voting issues:
1. Con has proven his burden that a foolish wit is better than a witty fool.

2. My contention 2,4 has never been addressed by Pro, nor has she ever mentioned it. They all stand. Recap:
Con 2: A wit has two outcomes: successful and foolish. Action is better than no action. Using a foolish wit can save a life, but being a witty fool that has both foolish and successful wit but never uses them cannot save a life and only gets in the way.
con 4: A foolish wit can later be seen as a successful wit. For example the attempt to find immortality seemed foolish, but later it was seen as a successful because gunpowder was discovered.

3. A foolish wit has no impact if it is neutralized by a clever cover up. Therefore a foolish wit can be concealed. A foolish wit can be taken as a life lesson. Taking a foolish action contains the probability of saving a life, it is better than taking no action (witty fool) and absolutely allowing that person to die.

4. Con has attacked every argument posted by Pro. The majority of con's case and refutals stands. Con's challenge remains untouched in contention 2.

5. Pro refuted little of Con's rebuttals. Therefore whatever wasn't hit stands and are considered as voting issues.

6. Pro has contradicted herself on several occasions. In several cases she agreed with Con.

Therefore I have proven that a foolish wit is better than a witty fool so vote Con. Thank you for reading this. And thank you for providing this debate Vrinda.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by vrinda 7 years ago
vrinda
i like your wits , you actually proved to be sniperjake
pro
Posted by Brock_Meyer 7 years ago
Brock_Meyer
C: Tied.
S&G: Con.
A: Con.
S: Tied.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
No. What if CON does something even crazier? What if he forfeits every round after the first?
Posted by diety 7 years ago
diety
What the hell? What kind of debate is this? I'm automatically voting CON.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
...um...

Interesting is the right word.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Sniperjake1994 6 years ago
Sniperjake1994
vrindaSniperjake1994Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by wpfairbanks 6 years ago
wpfairbanks
vrindaSniperjake1994Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Brock_Meyer 7 years ago
Brock_Meyer
vrindaSniperjake1994Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04