Which side makes a better case?
avatar
12 Comments
  • Filter by:
  • Pro
  • Draw
  • Con
  • 2 years ago

    @qallout I'll take the last spot if you let me pick topics (instead of being chosen by what eli did)

  • 2 years ago

    I think there's a difference between freedom and morality. I agree with Con that people should be free to make bad decisions, but that's different than saying those bad decisions are moral decisions, so I'm voting Pro, who pointed out that you have moral responsibilities to yourself, which seems like a winning argument here.

    • 2 years ago

      @debateme13 Agreed, similar sentiment and analysis.

    • 2 years ago

      @debateme13 I would largely concur, along with the fact that Pro pointed out harming oneself harms others, meaning that it is immoral (according to the arguments presented int he round).

    • 2 years ago

      @debateme13 Interesting point of view. In my opinion, morality can only come into existence via the infringement or allowance of individual autonomy. Freedom is intrinsic to morality, and we define morality in general by the infringement on the freedom of others.

    • 2 years ago

      @josh808 Although in isolation, i.e. someone without a social group, it does not harm others, and therefore the motion is incorrect in its generalisation.

    • 2 years ago

      @ellbar I would like to point out that it was difficult for me to weigh the debate because neither debater warranted their moral framework well..

  • 2 years ago
    • 2 years ago

      Although both sides present compelling cases for their view of morality, this is a clear con win imo

      Mainly because the pro's definition seems to be in tension with the topic. By defining an excess of pleasure as unpleasurable it seems in tension with the topic. Con calls him on this and I dont think it ever gets a good response