The Instigator
tanner_1230
Con (against)
The Contender
briannaxrice
Pro (for)

It is impossible to change some people's opinions on some issues, given they are mistaken

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
tanner_1230 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/1/2018 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 407 times Debate No: 113356
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

tanner_1230

Con

As I have increased my time on debate.org I have began to stumble across people, who regardless of sound logic and patient words refuse to accept defeat on their viewpoint. In order to discuss this phenomenon I have created this debate.

Now, since I created this debate and at the time I don't have a bias on this issue, I have decided to oppose this view. The justification is that it is much harder to prove the negative of this issue than the positive (Due to the generalities made on some issues and some people).

Accordingly, to give con a more fair advantage this is how the flow of this debate will work.
Round One - Con - Opening information
Pro - Acceptance/Opening Arguments
Round Two - Con - Opening Arguments
Pro - Rebuttal
Round Three - Con - Rebuttal
Pro - Empty (Possible thank you)
It is important to note that the last round for Pro should have no influence on voting, whatsoever. This round is meant solely to give Con his time to rebuttal.

Rules/Assumptions
1. Pro cannot use examples based on religion, politics, and policies etc. The justification is this is not a debate to discuss such matters. Also these examples are too complex such that a clear answer isn't immediately evident.

2. Following that we are assuming for this debate that the person we are trying to convince is mistaken in their current viewpoint. So the argument I cannot convince a person that the truth isn't the truth is not valid.

3. I expect good behavior and serious arguments. If you cannot do this do not accept. If you directly insult me or do not put forth an appropriate effort (this is a bit broad but I'm not going to be crazy strict about this clause), I will accept this as a forfeit of the debate.

Pro can win in a variety of ways. The obvious is coming up with an example that a person cannot be convinced of the truth. Con can win by properly denying all there claims/examples. (giving the majority of the burden of proof to Pro seems fair, since it is much easier to prove)

I am really excited for this debate. If you have any clarity questions just put them in the comments (ex. definitions or a need of stricter rules). Let's begin
briannaxrice

Pro

It actually can be possible. Not for all, but most. Once both see two sides of things, they may understand. Some people are not mistaken, sometimes both sides are mistaken. Yes, people can have their own opinions, but why not give it a chance to see if the opinion could be changed?
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by tanner_1230 3 years ago
tanner_1230
Brianna, you do realize you are pro, meaning you support the statement "it is impossible to change people's opinions on some issues, given they are mistaken."
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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