Instigator / Con

InFakeWars

1461

rating

debates

12.5%

won

Topic

#893

Universal Morals exist within society

Status

Finished

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

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After 6 votes and with 31 points ahead, the winner is...

Barney

Tags

Philosophy

Parameters

Publication date: 05.09.2019 10:12PM
Last updated date: 06.04.2019 11:49PM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 5
Time for argument: Three days
Max argument characters: 30,000
Voting period: Two weeks
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Pro

Barney

1815

rating

debates

100.0%

won

Description

Universal Morals are a philosophical debate dating around as old as True Altruism. So, today's debate follows whether or not there exists a Universal Moral. If so, the Affirmative must provide this evidence and moral, while the Negation (Me), will debate otherwise.

Round 1

InFakeWars

05.13.2019 02:05AM

Con

Forfeited

Barney

05.13.2019 03:26AM

Pro

Due to my opponent forfeiting, I am going to keep this brief...

Human Society:
Society is the voluntary groupings of people with a shared goal. In the USA we often boil it down to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Every member of society seeks to maximize the value derived from those three things. The form varies, and the level of important to each varies, but the morals at the heart do not.

Evil:
Those who oppose societal universal morals (rapists, terrorists, people of whichever political party you are opposed, etc.), are not true members of society, thus do not invalidate anything.

Round 2

InFakeWars

05.14.2019 01:22AM

Con

There is no such thing as A Universal Moral, that exists in Society. No matter what, there is always something to an acceptable reason behind what would normally be against morals, such as murder, that would be accepted in other society's. Whether that be Religion, Utilitarianism, or law, there is always something keeping Universal Morals from being truly Universal. As stated in the Description, I would like to see my opponent start with a Universal Moral and debate from there.

One thing, Keep in mind that Universal means within all Societies. Not just within American, but also all of Asia, Europe, Africa, Australia, And all countries within. The Affirmative must prove that there is a Universal Moral within all these Societies to win.

Barney

05.14.2019 07:06AM

Pro

Note: My opening case has been entirely dropped. So extend points.

Definitions:

These are taken from the short description written by my opponent, and visible on the debate listings page.

Universal Morals: Morals that are generally accepted within all society's.
Morals: A decision to tell between right from wrong.

Further, morals stem from values, and the terms are often used interchangeably. By the agreed definitions above, if people would consider violation of a value to be wrong, they have violated a moral; and if that being wrong is generally accepted by all societies, it is a universal moral.

Non-Extinction (nukes):

Yeah, I’m pulling the nuclear option (pun intended).

Stemming from the value of collectivism, we have the clear moral that seeking the extinction of our species would be wrong. Further, we have given men countless opportunities via nuclear weapons, no one has used the easy tool to make threat against this moral.

With thousands of nuclear detonations, there have been only two atomic bombs used against human targets, and both were strategically to save lives. Right now 40 countries are known to have access to a total of nearly 14,000 of the weapons, but the societies in each impose ethical restrictions which has successfully prevented them from being used to cause death.

Any countries that can be named without access, have specifically chosen not to successfully develop the technology. Bear in mind, they’ve had almost a century to do so, and pocket watches now possess more computing power than was needed for the original weapons development.

Round 3

InFakeWars

05.17.2019 07:06AM

Con

Forfeited

Barney

05.17.2019 01:29PM

Pro

Unchallenged Universal Morals:

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness (yes, that's just one)
Non-Extinction

Round 4

InFakeWars

05.18.2019 10:23PM

Con

Due to recent, uncalled events in my life, I'm sorry to say I can not continue the debate. I'm sorry for the inconvenience, and wish to you that we can do this debate again soon.

Also, because I have a character limit:

asasdfasdfasdasdgasdgadfsgas;dfkjasfdgkja;sdfgkljas;dlkfja;sdlkfjasld;kfja;sdkljfpqwoeirjtpaoskdjfapsdkjgapoiejgpqasdoifvjagperogjapsodijfagpodfibjpajdofbmaposidkijfasdfpiojasdfiojaspdifjapsdoifj

Barney

05.18.2019 11:20PM

Pro

No worries, I hope everything is either is okay or becomes so again soon.

Round 5

InFakeWars

05.21.2019 11:20PM

Con

Forfeited

Barney

05.21.2019 11:49PM

Pro

#10

My opponent conceded, so you all know how to vote.

K_Michael

05.13.2019 02:09AM

-->

@Pinkfreud08

Not looking too good so far.

Pinkfreud08

05.10.2019 03:57AM

Hope this debate goes somewhere

oromagi

05.23.2019 06:05PM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

concession

Pinkfreud08

05.22.2019 02:37AM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

I would like to thank both opponents for this debate.

POOR CONDUCT

Con has ff the majority of the rounds of the debate which is poor conduct

I ask the other voters to consider this when voting on conduct as well.

RationalMadman

05.22.2019 01:23AM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

C/FF

lehtimehu011

05.22.2019 01:09AM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Con conceded.

Ramshutu

05.22.2019 01:04AM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Concession.

David

05.22.2019 12:34AM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Concession