There have been a lot of fantastic debates in this section of the forums, so I thought we could make things a bit more "interesting." Here's how it works: I will create profiles on which 2 people will debate one-on-one on a topic of their choosing. You will receive points based on 3 categories: argument strength, evidence, and refutation. Argument strength is just that - how strong are your arguments. Logical fallacies and cogency of the argument play a strong role here (so, is the argument "correct" and does it make sense). Your spelling and grammar are important to, so either get a browser with spell-check or put your comments in Word or something that can check your spelling. Evidence is articles or journals to which you can provide links to help support your argument. How reliable the evidence is also matters, so Wikipedia articles will not count towards evidence. Refutation means being able to counter what your opponent is saying. If you can point out flaws in their argument or present counter-examples to their arguments then you can get points in this category. The debate will go on until a predetermined score has been reached. The winner will have his or her best argument point merited - thus receiving 25 AP! ---- So, if you want to join, just put your name, the topic you would like to debate about, and how many points you would like to go to (I would suggest maybe 10 or 15 for right now, I'm not exactly sure how all the scoring will work out yet). Also include your stance on the topic. Once you have this info posted, you have just given out a challenge and anyone can challenge you. If you would like to challenge someone, then post your name, their name, and the topic. Feel free to create multiple challenges, so long as you can keep track of them all! Once two debaters have been matched, I'll post a link to the profile on which you guys will be debating.
I think that's everything, but here's an example of a challenge:
Name: Moegreche Topic: Does God exist? My stance: God does not exist!
If someone were to challenge me, then they would have to argue an opposing view to mine (in this case, that God does exist). So, let the debates begin, and if anything is unclear or if I've missed anything then let me know either on this thread or on my profile. Thanks, and happy debating!!
Okay, so redbedhead and XCoheedX debating on Mary. Is that right? you guys are really gonna have to hold my hand through this one, but here's your profile: http://armorgames.com/user/Debate_Religion4
Megamickel, on your types of government debate, before I challenge you I'll need you to clearly define Fascism to know what it is we need to look for. I have my own definition of it but we need to be on the same page.
Fascism is an agressively nationalist government that was originally created by Benito Mussolini. The fundamental concepts of fascism are collectivism (the whole is far more important than the individual) and centralism of power. A fascist society, at least by my definition, would usually be militaristic and heavily controlled by propaganda. Ideally, one could build a society where rank would be based on intelligence. This, of course, would not work out in the real world, so society would function very similarly to the world today. However, the economy would be government funded, privately operated.
I, Necromancer, will debate on either of the following:
Resolution: In the United States, plea bargaining in exchange for testimony is unjust. Position:Affirmative
Resolution: God created the universe and thus evolution is a untrue. Position: Negative
Debate set up for either: -Affirmative goes first -Each side must present a standard, something to be striven for; e.g. justice, Constitutionality, morality, being tough on crime, etc and defend it -The standard determines how the round is weighed; i.e. if justice wins then both sides must prove their side coincides best with justice -Each sides presents arguments that they must stick to after their initial arguments they cannot create new arguments (excluding rebuttals of their opponents arguments) -The winner is decided objectively for how well their arguments hold up and link back to the rounds standard
If you would like to debate me but are unsure of any of the above conditions ask me.
I challenge Moegreche. I need to hear your position (if god does or does not exist) first. I have more background on why he does NOT exist. But note before anything else that most "debates" are fairly opinionated and are debates because they are opinionated. I hope your actually rating the content and presentation other than beliefs of yours. Remember, even though someone wins more points, it is not a "IS", it is a "might". Its not: God exist. More Like: God might/most likely exist because etc. With no further adu. I challenge you...
This thread itself is not for debates. I have not been accepting challenges up to this point, but at this time I think I have the scoring system under control and some people that are willing to judge my debates. I saw someone had challenged me on the existence of a god, which I do not believe in and pretty much agree with that argument. Besides, I've been reading a lot of those debates and it's kind of an old topic. I can't think of a subject on which I would like to debate, but just so everyone knows I'll be hunting for someone to challenge
Name:NeoScooto Topic:Chat Room problems My Point:The chat room has become a great mess of spam, warning, cursing, and hacking. This is a great problem that needs to be fixed now. What is the point of a chat room if we already have News, accounts, Forums, Store, Blog and much more? I really do not like the chat rooms.
