If nobody accepts this debate, then it means that nobody has a good enough argument to win this debate, meaning that I am correct in saying that Minecraft has only gotten worse since version 1.2.1.
An average woman cannot become 'beautiful' without excessive amounts of money for plastic surgery, but an average man can become a Chad by working out for four hours a day.
"In fact, women are financially privileged because even an average woman has the opportunity to sell her body."
Men can also sell their bodies. have you never seen a male prostitute?
Maybe a country with 11 aircraft carriers could beat the US if the US got caught completely off guard, but that's not very likely.
In prolonged naval warfare, the invading force generally has a disadvantage.
"But I would probably have voted in favor of PRO if he provided a robust ethical framework and used that to argue his case, rather than simply appealing to our emotions as voters."
Vote PRO if you have empathy and/or emotions.
Vote CON if you are a cold blooded psychopath who needs an ethical framework to decide right from wrong.
A: What if the suffering being experienced is already infinite? Ex: an infinite amount of people in an infinite amount of suffering.
B: What if opening the box made that suffering infinitely worse in another way? Ex: an infinite amount of people in an infinite amount of suffering for an infinite amount of time.
A: What if the suffering being experienced is already infinite, in an infinite number of ways? Then could you use the box?
B: What if opening the box made the suffering infinite, in an infinite number of ways. And then somehow did that in multiple ways?
Think of 2 parallel planes (math term): Each plane can fit an infinite amount of infinitely long lines.
A: What if the suffering was infinite, in an infinite number of ways. And that was somehow in an infinite number of ways? Then could you use the box?
I will accept this debate if you accept my debate - "People always have a moral responsibility to think critically about their actions."
It would break the tie.
Should I vote on my alt account too?
Wow.
Good point.
I agree with FishChaser on this one.
You can accept this debate if you actually have good points to make.
It would be better if I was more confident.
I'm underconfident.
Bias is to be expected. Vote.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVLjWZMX7U4
Music is subjective. I shouldn't have to write an essay on what I think about each song.
I would never troll anyone. Trolling is immoral.
Accept the debate to find out.
That was not intentional.
I never said that Buku was an electronic artist, I only said he was my favorite artist.
Buku is my favorite artist.
Thank you.
Why is that funny?
456 different rhyme sounds, not including words that don't rhyme with anything.
Shhhh
If nobody accepts this debate, then it means that nobody has a good enough argument to win this debate, meaning that I am correct in saying that Minecraft has only gotten worse since version 1.2.1.
I have something up my sleeve too. . .
An average woman cannot become 'beautiful' without excessive amounts of money for plastic surgery, but an average man can become a Chad by working out for four hours a day.
"In fact, women are financially privileged because even an average woman has the opportunity to sell her body."
Men can also sell their bodies. have you never seen a male prostitute?
Actually no, I changed my mind.
sure
Maybe a country with 11 aircraft carriers could beat the US if the US got caught completely off guard, but that's not very likely.
In prolonged naval warfare, the invading force generally has a disadvantage.
You cannot counter my logic if you cannot understand it.
Nobody.
Nobody debates like you, and that's for a good reason.
Your debates are the furthest thing from art.
Accept the debate
So the legends are true then
and no, I will host, later.
You really do feed off of chaos.
The line between suicide and self-manslaughter is a blurry one.
And I accept.
I did not try to rig this debate, though I apologize if it may seem that way.
This is a trap debate.
"But I would probably have voted in favor of PRO if he provided a robust ethical framework and used that to argue his case, rather than simply appealing to our emotions as voters."
Vote PRO if you have empathy and/or emotions.
Vote CON if you are a cold blooded psychopath who needs an ethical framework to decide right from wrong.
Good Game
The propeller suit isn't a freak weapon.
The propeller suit could be built using earthling tech.
My trap card was in the definition of suicide. For suicide to be considered suicide, intent is needed.
Take that 'Rational' Madman.
A: What if the suffering being experienced is already infinite? Ex: an infinite amount of people in an infinite amount of suffering.
B: What if opening the box made that suffering infinitely worse in another way? Ex: an infinite amount of people in an infinite amount of suffering for an infinite amount of time.
A: What if the suffering being experienced is already infinite, in an infinite number of ways? Then could you use the box?
B: What if opening the box made the suffering infinite, in an infinite number of ways. And then somehow did that in multiple ways?
Think of 2 parallel planes (math term): Each plane can fit an infinite amount of infinitely long lines.
A: What if the suffering was infinite, in an infinite number of ways. And that was somehow in an infinite number of ways? Then could you use the box?
It never ends. LOL
Responding to Benjamin's comment:
Well what if I took that hell, and I made it worse. Do you really think that there is a limit to human suffering?