The Instigator
Sophisto
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
carnew
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Philosopher Kings are the solution.

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...
Sophisto
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/2/2018 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 394 times Debate No: 113420
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Sophisto

Pro

Rules: quality sources, not quantity.
Anecdotes are forbidden. New rules can be updated in comments.

Arguments: Plato had the idea, but he"s not here now. Ph . D"s would be apt to replace dictators and prime ministers. Experts would be forbidden from developing an elitist paradigm. Educated and competent leaders are not only pertinent to global improvement and future survival. Greedy corporations are killing humanity.

https://youtu.be...

https://youtu.be...

Thank you for accepting.
carnew

Con

"Anecedote"- quantity man, a guy that likes quantity and bREking the rools
Debate Round No. 1
Sophisto

Pro

Two sources are hardly excessive. Trolling will end in a forfeiture. Please take this seriously. Do you know what an anecdote is? This is all I am able to refute...

Very well. People such as my opponent prove why philosopher kings are mandatory.
carnew

Con

carenew= flossing king
Debate Round No. 2
Sophisto

Pro

I have restarted this debate for a worthier opponent. Apologies.
carnew

Con

you just got FLIIPIn INTEMITEAD by me. Flee my presence you son of a dang magnito Chrstino, cuz ur the one that clearly got rekt.
Debate Round No. 3
Sophisto

Pro

Hardly. You"re a joke. Take your delusions elsewhere.
carnew

Con

my boy its spelt ILLUSION not dulusion you dum
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Leaning 3 years ago
Leaning
SophistocarnewTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Con loses in conduct for trolling the debate and wasting Pros time.

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