The Instigator
Cherrypalm
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Minddagger
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

The "Is Water Wet?" Debate is a race divider (racism) debate

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...
Minddagger
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/17/2018 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,804 times Debate No: 108169
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (42)
Votes (1)

 

Cherrypalm

Pro

I will take the side that proposes this resolution, and the con will be the one that opposes this resolution.

Link to video to watch: https://m.youtube.com...
Minddagger

Con

very well, I accept!
Debate Round No. 1
Cherrypalm

Pro

Here may I present my case.

This ongoing debate trend wasn't necessarily debating if "water is wet" or not because it seemed like a stupid question from the start. We all know that water is wet and all that other stuff, but that was not the main point of that debate. My position is that the "Is Water Wet?" debate was mainly based as a race divider debate because it wasn't meant to debate if water is wet or not. It was mainly to say that if someone implied that water is wet, then they meant that all people are white. If someone implied that water is not wet, then they meant that all people are black, which both sides of that "Is Water Wet?" debate are false.

Saying that all people are white, or all people are black is racist, and that would offend anyone of color, especially African Americans. You can't just say that all men and women are white or black, because that is false. Not all men and women are white; And, not all men or women are black. Each side of this "debate" are demonstrating racial superiority over another race. Whites are showing superiority over Blacks, and Blacks are showing superiority over Whites. It is so divisive. It is a racism debate not just because how it works and how it has nothing to do with water being wet or not, but the fact that the majority of the people who say that water is not wet are black people, and not enough whites to voice themselves to make this "debate" fair enough for them.

There, my case has been stated. I will now wait for Minddagger to make his opposing case.
Minddagger

Con

You forget that most people who debate this topic are the SAME RACE, if this were a race divider, wouldn't the debaters be different races? for example, if it was a race divider, it would be black vs white, but most people debating this are black, and they are debating it AGAINST EACH OTHER.

Source:
Debate Round No. 2
Cherrypalm

Pro

But, you are also forgetting that white people are part of this debate too.

Videos:
(1) https://m.youtube.com...
(2) https://m.youtube.com...
(3) https://m.youtube.com...

I'm not excluding anybody by race, which proves my point.

Which is "the fact that the majority of the people who say that water is not wet are black people, and not enough whites to voice themselves to make this "debate" fair enough for them."
Minddagger

Con

Well, if this truly was a race thing, wouldn't their be a lot of toxicity of racism in the comment sections?

plus I never said that their aren't white people involved, most people who argue against each other are the same race! if white people are a minority in this like you said, the potential of 2 different races is 25% at the most.
Debate Round No. 3
Cherrypalm

Pro

Well you said this " it would be black vs white, but most people debating this are black, and they are debating it AGAINST EACH OTHER." That has proven you said that whites are the minority of this "is water wet?" debate.

There would be much toxicity, but not like hundreds of thousands of comments though. Just go with how I demonstrated the resolution in the second round, and you'll see a clear context on how this racism plays out throughout the comment section of many of these "is water wet?" videos.

Plus, I was not talking about race and racism like it had to do with the entire population of black and white people. I was only talking about blacks and whites that posted these debate videos. You are conflating the fact that I only mentioned blacks and whites that posted the video to either end this foolish debate or to continue it.

There, I answered all your questions.
Minddagger

Con

"There would be much toxicity, but not like hundreds of thousands of comments though. Just go with how I demonstrated the resolution in the second round, and you'll see a clear context on how this racism plays out throughout the comment section of many of these "is water wet?" videos."

first off, I don't see any comments turning this into a race thing, but even if its true, if so few are taking it that way, how would the entire thing be considered a "racial divide".

"Plus, I was not talking about race and racism like it had to do with the entire population of black and white people. I was only talking about blacks and whites that posted these debate videos. You are conflating the fact that I only mentioned blacks and whites that posted the video to either end this foolish debate or to continue it."

let me give you a description on what "racism" means.

Racism is something in which a person hates ALL people who have a certain skin color, you said that the debate is all about if someone implied that water is wet, then they meant that all people are white. If someone implied that water is not wet, then they meant that all people are black.

this is where you contradict yourself, you say that it has nothing to do with racism, but in the first round you state it has everything to do with racism, thus making a contradiction.

If the debate topic is a racial divide, than why do so many people of the same race have this debate?
Debate Round No. 4
Cherrypalm

Pro

Here are my rebuttals.

1. "Racism is something in which a person hates ALL people who have a certain skin color, you said that the debate is all about if someone implied that water is wet, then they meant that all people are white. If someone implied that water is not wet, then they meant that all people are black."

This is incorrect, let me define to you what racism is, first off (According to Marriam-Webster).

Racism: A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race [1]

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com...

Secondly, Even if I said that, it doesn't necessarily mean that I said that there were only black people in this debate. There are white people too, which you are excluding them from the debate ironically.

2. "this is where you contradict yourself, you say that it has nothing to do with racism, but in the first round you state it has everything to do with racism, thus making a contradiction."

I never said this at all, you made this up just in attempt to get an easy win. I only said it has to do with racism and I demonstrated that in the first round.

Let me reinstate that to you, so you understand my demonstration.

This ongoing debate trend wasn't necessarily debating if "water is wet" or not because it seemed like a stupid question from the start. We all know that water is wet and all that other stuff, but that was not the main point of that debate. My position is that the "Is Water Wet?" debate was mainly based as a race divider debate because it wasn't meant to debate if water is wet or not. It was mainly to say that if someone implied that water is wet, then they meant that all people are white. If someone implied that water is not wet, then they meant that all people are black, which both sides of that "Is Water Wet?" debate are false.

Saying that all people are white, or all people are black is racist, and that would offend anyone of color, especially African Americans. You can't just say that all men and women are white or black, because that is false. Not all men and women are white; And, not all men or women are black. Each side of this "debate" are demonstrating racial superiority over another race. Whites are showing superiority over Blacks, and Blacks are showing superiority over Whites. It is so divisive. It is a racism debate not just because how it works and how it has nothing to do with water being wet or not, but the fact that the majority of the people who say that water is not wet are black people, and not enough whites to voice themselves to make this "debate" fair enough for them.

3. "first off, I don't see any comments turning this into a race thing, but even if its true, if so few are taking it that way, how would the entire thing be considered a "racial divide"."

First off, you misrepresented what I said entirely, I didn't mean to literally read the comments, I meant don't take my demonstration out of context, which you did anyway. Taking things out of context does not help you in any way to refute any arguments I made. You took it out of context by making an overgeneralized assumption to take comments literally in a poor attempt to refute my arguments and my demonstration.

My conclusions are:
1. The "Is Water Wet?" debate is a race divider (racism) debate. If someone implied that water is not wet, then he implied that all people are black, and if the person implied that water is wet, then he implied that all people are white. It is divisive, racist, and there are not enough whites to voice themselves out to make the "debate" fair enough.

2. The con took everything I have demonstrated and argued way out of context. Taking things out of context does not help you in any way to refute any arguments I made. You took it out of context by making an overgeneralized assumption to take comments literally in a poor attempt to refute my arguments and my demonstration.

3. The con has failed to refute any of my arguments and my demonstration by taking my arguments out of context, misrepresenting some things that I said, and not even making a valid case against said arguments.

The conclusions are clear, I demonstrated my position, I refuted every argument he ever made, and answered every question con ever asked me.

Here are all the sources I used in all of my arguments:
(1) https://m.youtube.com...
(2) https://m.youtube.com...
(3) https://m.youtube.com...
(4) https://m.youtube.com...
(5) https://www.merriam-webster.com...

I will implore that everyone should Vote Pro!

This has been a fun and fair debate. I hope Minddagger the best of luck in other debates.
Minddagger

Con

Very well then, here are my rebuttals.

"This is incorrect, let me define to you what racism is, first off (According to Marriam-Webster).
Racism: A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race [1] Secondly, Even if I said that, it doesn't necessarily mean that I said that there were only black people in this debate. There are white people too, which you are excluding them from the debate ironically]"

Yes, and wouldn't saying that all people are white or black, be saying that your race is superior? speaking of which we still don't have any connection to the "is water wet" debate topic and racism, also, you say that I am excluding white people ironically, which is untrue, because I refer to all the debaters as "they" or "certain skin color".

"I never said this at all, you made this up just in attempt to get an easy win. I only said it has to do with racism and I demonstrated that in the first round."

let me quote you on what you said, you can find it in your statement in the 2nd round or your last round:

"Saying that all people are white, or all people are black is racist"

so basically, you said that it has everything to do with racism.

"First off, you misrepresented what I said entirely, I didn't mean to literally read the comments, I meant don't take my demonstration out of context, which you did anyway. Taking things out of context does not help you in any way to refute any arguments I made. You took it out of context by making an overgeneralized assumption to take comments literally in a poor attempt to refute my arguments and my demonstration."

your going to have to say HOW I misrepresented your statement if you want to accuse me of that, otherwise its going to look like you just want an easy win. and this is not the first time you pulled this, in your conclusions TWICE you made the same statement, which counts as pandering.

Conclusion: the "is water wet" debate is not a racial divide because no one from bryan's sources are taking it a race thing.

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate
Debate Round No. 5
42 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 21 through 30 records.
Posted by Cherrypalm 3 years ago
Cherrypalm
This has been a very interesting debate.
Posted by Cherrypalm 3 years ago
Cherrypalm
The comment I made ended the joke called "TARGO."

Too bad, KwLm.
Posted by Cherrypalm 3 years ago
Cherrypalm
Anyway, The Roast Game is fact!
Posted by Cherrypalm 3 years ago
Cherrypalm
Let's not get too cocky, KwLm.
Posted by KwLm 3 years ago
KwLm
Well yeah, I would be because I don't think about such things...... Have you got some daddy issues there bryan? Trying to change the subject of you being a lying piece of human garbage with an egotistical issue?
Posted by Cherrypalm 3 years ago
Cherrypalm
Let's keep playing. You are oblivious to your dad's cock.
Posted by KwLm 3 years ago
KwLm
You keep entertaining me with your blatant stupidity, I'll keep laughing, it's all very entertaining hahahahaha
Posted by Cherrypalm 3 years ago
Cherrypalm
Keep laughing troll.

Just keep laughing. I'll play your comment games.
Posted by KwLm 3 years ago
KwLm
No I find you hilarious because you're so oblivious to the truth. hahahahaha can't even defend it, cause it's all true hahahaha
Posted by Cherrypalm 3 years ago
Cherrypalm
Such irony, you find everything hilarious. You're so 13. I made an album to paint your dead face a picture.
You are the troll.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 3 years ago
dsjpk5
CherrypalmMinddaggerTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 

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