The Instigator
Pro (for)
5 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points


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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/14/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 552 times Debate No: 99909
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




1) No personal attacks, ad hominem, insults
2) Do not rebut your opponent's arguments and present new arguments. Only do one or the other: it would put you at too much of an advantage if you could both rebut my arguments and present new arguments. Either present different arguments for your position(which could be pessimism or realism) or just offer rebuttals to my argument. Please don't do both, since I am unable to do both since there is just one round of debate. If you do both, voters have reason to vote for me for conduct.

My argument:
I believe optimism is ideal over realism or pessimism because it enables us to do things we would not normally attempt. It is scientifically sound and factual that we tend to not try things we think we can't do[1] and optimism helps us out in this way. If we were pessimists, we would more often see things as impossible to do, and thus never try them. As a pessimist, you may never try many things you could actually excel at, but as an optimist, you will more likely try these things and you may discover something new you're good at. Even being a realist isn't always beneficial, for the odds might be that you won't accomplish something, so you're being realistic in saying that the chances are that you won't be able to do that feat, but an optimist would attempt to do it anyways, and they may succeed.

Optimists are more likely to engage in active coping when negative things arise, whereas pessimists are more likely to use avoidant coping.[1] Active coping is superior because it means you're doing something to get out of the negative problem, whereas avoiding the problem won't make it go away. At least with active coping, there is a possibility you can put an end to the problem, but avoiding it means it definitely won't go away.

Now, while there are some negative things about being overly optimistic, such as believing that you achieved success because of yourself, without giving credit to other things such as a friend, luck, or whatever else may have helped you. Additionally, optimists are more likely to use constructive action against problems, but if a problem is unchangeable, then this would all be wasted. This is why I would say it is good to be healthily optimistic but understand there are some situations where optimism won't work and being realistic is necessary. That said, I am not supporting realism, as I believe it should only be used in some instances, but optimism should be the default position for most situations.



A fair mix of the two is ideal, hope is necessary but staying grounded in reality is just as useful or more so.
Debate Round No. 1
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by CosmoJarvis 2 years ago
It's a renaissance-style Tom Hardy portrait. I'm pretty sure that this picture is based off of a famous renaissance portrait though.
Posted by Doom-Guy-666-1993 2 years ago
I own that painting, what is it called?
Posted by CosmoJarvis 2 years ago
Con somewhat agrees with pro, and fails to provide any sort of argument, or at least make an effort to do so.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Mharman 2 years ago
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made just one tiny argument. Pro made an argument that used sources.