Instigator / Pro

7000series

1511

rating

debates

38.64%

won

Topic

#5368

People always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Winner

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!

Tags

Morality

Thought

Parameters

Publication date: 03.15.2024 10:14PM
Last updated date: 04.19.2024 11:27PM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 4
Time for argument: Two days
Max argument characters: 5,000
Voting period: One month
Point system: Winner selection
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

CronicPain2

1500

rating

debates

25.0%

won

Description

I will be arguing that people always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.
My opponent wins this debate if they are able to prove that people do not always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.

Round 1

7000series

03.19.2024 12:35AM

Pro

Thank you, chronic pain, for accepting this debate.

My claim relies on 2 main points:

Morality is the assessment of ethical consequences.
To fully assess the consequences of a decision, one must think critically.

Conclusion: Morality cannot exist without critical thought.

Rewritten: People have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.

Plus, when people do not think critically about their actions, these types of things tend to happen.

This is a work free drug place
Jesus scares
Baby needs beers and wines
Extremely slow children playing
Etc.

CronicPain2

03.19.2024 02:44AM

Con

Why should one care about the consequences from his actions? You haven’t proved that.

And why wouldn’t morality exist without critical thought? Someone might be stupid and not have critical thinking but they might be a good person / moral person.

Round 2

7000series

03.19.2024 12:25PM

Pro

And why wouldn’t morality exist without critical thought? Someone might be stupid and not have critical thinking but they might be a good person / moral person.

The Oxford Dictionary defines morality as:

Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

Morality could not exist without critical thinking because critical thinking is the only way to make the distinction between right and wrong.

With that in mind:

Why should one care about the consequences from his actions? You haven’t proved that.

I have proved that critical thought is necessary for morality.
People who do not think critically about their actions cannot be considered moral people.

People always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.

CronicPain2

03.20.2024 02:50AM

Con

Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

Nowhere it says in the definition you need critical thinking and nowhere it says that to have principles you need critical thinking.

because critical thinking is the only way to make the distinction between right and wrong.

Prove it. I already did. Critical thinking is something intelligent people can do. Stupid people cant. But stupid people can still be moral. They can still recognize good from bad by using empathy, compassion etc.

I have proved that critical thought is necessary for morality.

No you haven’t.

People who do not think critically about their actions cannot be considered moral people.

Yes they can. There are some very stupid people that are good. If you are a good person, theres no way someone can say you’re not moral.

Round 3

7000series

03.20.2024 06:28PM

Pro

Some people recognize good from bad by using empathy, compassion etc.

Empathy is an emotion.

People who blindly follow their emotions don't know right from wrong.

Conclusion: Critical thinking is the only way to make the distinction between right and wrong.

Rewritten: People always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.

CON's argument is so weak, even I could have done better.

Also, this statement is FALSE:

Critical thinking is something intelligent people can do. Stupid people cant.

The Oxford Dictionary defines critical thinking as:

The process of analyzing information in order to make a logical decision about the extent to which you believe something to be true or false.

According to this definitions, even stupid people have the capacity for critical thinking.

Thus, people always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.

CronicPain2

03.20.2024 07:12PM

Con

Seems like PRO created a debate without even having any proper arguments for his position first. Everything he said is an assertion and he tries to smuggle in “blindly following emotions” when I just gave an example of a retarded person making the right decision in situations where good and bad is involved. Unless you want to prove stupid people cant be good or moral or you want to prove that stupid people (who by definition lack critical thinking) can critically think you lose.

People can be moral without being smart.

analyzing information in order to make a logical decision

Is something a retard cant do. Now you have to prove all retards are immoral because they cant think logically or analyze a situation with critical thinking. Good luck

Round 4

7000series

03.20.2024 08:52PM

Pro

Wow, your skull is thicker than that of a pachycephalosaurus!

The title of this debate:

People always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.

The short description of this debate:

(Excluding people who are severely mentally impaired)

Conceded: Mentally impaired people may not be able to think critically.

However: Pretty much everybody else has the ability to think critically.

You also said this:

He tries to smuggle in “blindly following emotions”

Human empathy is flawed. Readers, it is that simple.

Critical thinking is the only way to ascertain that your empathy has not led you astray.

Conclusion: Critical thinking is the only way to make the distinction between right and wrong.

Rewritten: People always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions.

Seems like PRO created a debate without even having any proper arguments for his position first.

And yet I have managed to come out ahead.

CronicPain2

03.20.2024 11:27PM

Con

Oopsy Daisy sorry didn’t see the short description, excuse my thick skull. Let’s disregard the retards then but Im still not convinced everyone else can use critical thinking either. I mean even if they are not retard or mentally disabled theres a lot of average people who can’t think critically . Like my brother for example. He is not mentally disabled he just has poor judgment (stupid) and lacks critical thinking. Ive also met tons of normal people who lack critical thinking. In general the people who can think critically are fewer than the people who cant. That doesn’t mean they cant be good people and can still make decisions based on other things like emotions. Yes emotions are flawed but thats not the topic of the debate. You cant hold someone responsible for not critically think if they are just not able to or say they cant be moral idk whatever the case is. Thanks for your time mate have a good one bye

Ps: i think i gave examples of people being able to make a decision between right and wrong using emotions. Doesn’t matter if its flawed. PRO didn’t say the only RIGHT way to judge is critical thinking. He said the only way to judge is critical thinking. Or if you did say it somewhere by bad, I didn’t really read too much of anything

JoeBob

03.22.2024 11:15PM

-->

@CronicPain2

Do you by any chance have chronic pain? I have a feeling you do

7000series

03.16.2024 11:54PM

-->

@Best.Korea

You can accept this debate if you actually have good points to make.

Best.Korea

03.16.2024 09:03AM

"People have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions"

No, I dont.

Me, like my ancestors before me, lack all critical thinking.

A moral responsibility would imply that I have duty to do that, which I dont.

Even if you say it helps the world or me, you are only following a false premise that helping world or me is a good thing.

7000series

03.15.2024 11:51PM

Accept the debate to find out.

Hurried4675

03.15.2024 11:40PM

Would children also be excluded as a point in this debate? Also, since this is a philosophy thing, I assume a person is just someone who is granted person-hood, meaning, they have a moral consideration.

Benjamin

03.15.2024 11:17PM

Some situations thinking critically wastes precious time. Going with your guts when making split time decisions can be the morally correct in many cases.