The Instigator
onyux
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Soriak
Con (against)
Winning
2 Points

Are phones more beneficial than harmful?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 2 votes the winner is...
Soriak
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/14/2018 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,079 times Debate No: 110720
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

onyux

Pro

The ability to communicate is important in today's mobile society. One communication option is a cellular phone. Having a cellular phone, also known as cell phone, offers you different features. Some features include storage capabilities, a camera and its small size. These, and others, are some reasons why a cell phone is good to have. Before you buy one, you should decide how you will use it so you can make a good investment.

The ability to communicate is important in today's mobile society. One communication option is a cellular phone. Having a cellular phone, also known as cell phone, offers you different features. Some features include storage capabilities, a camera and its small size. These, and others, are some reasons why a cell phone is good to have. Before you buy one, you should decide how you will use it so you can make a good investment.

There are many different reasons to buy a cell phone.

For Safety
Having a cell phone can help in emergency situations. You may not have access to a landline telephone or another person's cell phone. Types of emergencies can range from tornadoes to car breakdowns to hurricanes. If you want a cell phone only for emergencies, purchasing a pre-paid cell phone would be the way to go.

Replace Landline Telephone
You can use a cell phone as a replacement for a landline phone. This option can save you money. Before you explore this option, though, compare how much you can save when you switch landline-phone usage to cell-phone usage. Choose a cell-phone plan that matches your needs and budget.

For Business
A cell phone can have personal or business uses. This allows you to leave your office. You will not miss telephone calls. Having a business cell phone means you will be able to contact your clients, vendors or suppliers. Make a list of features for your business cell phone. One feature to have is decent sound quality, so you don't miss anything the person, on the other end of the call, says.

For Legal Evidence
The use of cell-phone records and pictures can help with legal cases, such as a car accident. If you have a cell phone with a built-in camera and have an accident, you can snap a photo of the car damage. The photograph and police accident report can provide legal evidence.

For Music
When you spend time traveling to work or school, you can listen to your music. Some cell phones use a media center that gives you a way to download songs. Check how many songs you can have stored on your phone.

For Text Messaging
A good reason to have a cell phone involves sending text messages. Text messages act as short descriptions typed into your phone. You can send these messages when you are in a noisy environment, such as a nightclub. Find out if your cell-phone plan charges a different rate for texts as opposed to telephone calls.

For these reasons, I think that smart phones are more beneficial than harmful.
Soriak

Con

Ignoring the fact that Pro has just copied and pasted this article from https://www.techwalla.com... I will attempt to negate the resolution. Now, I think it should be clear to the voters that I do not have to prove that phones are more harmful than beneficial to win this debate, but instead I can take the approach of proving (or show a reasonable doubt) that we don't know whether phones are more beneficial or harmful, and as a result pro would not meet their burden.

Argument 1: Pro's case doesn't prove their case, pro just provides instances where cell phones may be beneficial. Keep in mind, the argument is whether phones overall are more beneficial than harmful. Pro thinks that they can prove this by just giving instances of where it may be the case that phones are beneficial. This is unsatisfactory. If I am trying to prove overall killing is good, and I just give historical examples of where killing has been good, it"s not enough to claim that killing is good, only that in some cases killing can be good. In short, Pro had to do more than just provide some examples.

More problems. 1) This debate isn't a battle of who can give the most instances, aka, who get's the highest number of cases where phones are either beneficial or harmful. Because in reality there is an unrealistic number of cases which people could name where phones are harmful/beneficial, and it's impossible to compile it all onto a document. So to compare my opponent's speech and mine to see who can get the highest number of instances, is futile, it doesn't prove anything. For example, when trying to prove that killing is good, let"s say my opponent gives 2 instances of where it"s bad and I give 3 instances where killing is good, this doesn"t prove killing is good for many reasons. Such as, both my opponent and I cannot account for every possible scenario that involves killing.

2) Even if one could compile all the instances onto one document, the topic would still require us to take into consideration the magnitude of these instances. In some cases the harmfulness of a situation is very severe, and in other cases the benefits are very little. So this debate wouldn't be about just the numbers, even if it were possible for it to be about the numbers. To further this argument, let"s revisit the killing example, if my opponent gave an instance of where killing is bad because it led to 2 deaths, and I gave one instance of where killing is good because it led to the saving of countless lives, although we both only have one instance, the severity of my example outweighs theirs.

3) My opponent's reasons for why phones are beneficial and also be applied in the reverse. For example, "For Safety", can also be contrasted with the cell phone's use for danger. Cell phones sometimes lead to harassment, cyberbullying, etc. Which can in turn lead to suicide. So it"s not like these arguments are anything valuable, if the same thing can be said for the other side and thus null the argument.

In conclusion, these arguments should suffice in convincing the voters that Pro hasn"t met any burden, has committed to bad practice in plagiarizing, and at the very least raise significant doubts as to the resolution which would mean Pro hasn"t gone past a reasonable doubt. And so this in turn should be a vote for the Con.
Debate Round No. 1
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 3 years ago
dsjpk5
onyuxSoriakTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagiarism is poor conduct.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 3 years ago
Midnight1131
onyuxSoriakTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: As Pro has plagiarized his entire argument, he loses conduct points. Also, because one side of the debate is entirely plagiarized, it would not be fair to Con to judge this based on the arguments given.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.