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

Philosophy Debates are just mental fights to feel superior

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
mschechtel17 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/14/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 438 times Debate No: 95408
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




No trolls.
I propose that the true goal, conscious or unconscious, of a philosophical debate is the same goal of a boxer or MMA fighter. The goal is to prove your superior to another, the only difference between boxing and philosophical debating is you use your mind rather than body to feel superior. One might mask their true intentions by saying their goal is to expand the depths of their mind and knowledge, but this is a lie to themselves and their opponent.

3 rounds, start with your argument and any questions.


I don't argue that your point isn't valid in some cases; only that there's no clear and verifiable way to know another's motivations.

Examples of possible motivations based on personal experiences:
Brain games - to keep your mind sharp
Product research
Actually looking for an answer to a question
To help one make a decision

I would be interested in your argument as to how these motivations can be linked to some desire to prove one's superiority over another.
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
No comments have been posted on this debate.
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.