Money can buy happiness
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 3 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Half troll debate, half serious, so don’t read too much into it.
This debate really boils down to how literally one wants to interpret the resolution. Pro argues that money can buy happiness both literally (through the purchase of dopamine) and vicariously (through the purchase of goods that bring us happiness). After getting pushback on the dopamine argument, Pro never revisits it, so I will not consider that point when determining my vote. Other than that point, there was a bit of back and forth over Con's coffee maker analogy. While I personally found the analogy dubious, non of Pro's retorts adequately rebutted it. He kept reasserting that things you buy give you happiness vicariously, but that does not address the analogy. Indeed, something can give you happiness like a coffee maker gives coffee, but buying a coffee maker does not suddenly provide the coffee, it is just a vehicle to create it. Pro's inability to address this analogy is why I am siding with Con.
The debate was interesting as Pro, and Con made valid points. However, what made me choose Pro's argument is that their stance is that buying things indirectly buy happiness by getting you things that make you happy. While Con does try to say that buying things only facilities happiness, the argument itself is more in favor of Pro's position. Con Should have tried to argue from different angels; like claiming that true happiness is not defined by things you buy. They unfortunately did not in this case and that cost them the vote.
The point that "you buy things for the purpose of making you happy" is true. Even though it is indirect, it makes you happy; therefore you are buying happiness.
I suppose money can buy items and situations that tend to make one happier,
Fulfilling basic needs like food, shelter, safety.
Though if one trades pride or family for money to buy those above, still might not make one happy.
If one lacks the intelligence to know what 'to buy, money again might not buy happiness.
There 'are unhappy rich people,
Money can alienate one from friends, family, and ordinary people,
Warp one's values that they cannot relate to ordinary people or their motivations,
Allows power, which sounds good, but you can buy drugs with that, which also seem good, until you've done them too much and go crazy.
Or weird surgeries that your yes men tell you is a good idea, but is not.
Course debate is money 'can buy happiness, and I suppose it 'can, in the sense of items and situations,
Claiming it can't if one doesn't know what to spend it on, is like saying money can't buy food if one lacks the intelligence to identify an apple in a store,
Course being able to identify what will bring one happiness, or being able to 'follow that knowledge, may not be easy for everyone.
Poor people can still be happy, or happier with what they have family, work, honest effort and living, than a great deal of money or gold toilets.
Things which make me happy, such as smartphone, were bought with money. I cant be poor buddhist monk.