CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


Twitter
Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!


pic
Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Imagination

Reward Points:25
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
100%
Arguments:10
Debates:3
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

Religion in the modern world has a much less central role in defining the morals of the average person. We're pretty privileged in terms of how mannerly our society is in America and other 1st world countries. In a much more primitive time, religion had a much more central role in defining someones morals, because there wasn't a society that by itself incentivized following any morals. So I'd say yes, overall, religion has benefited society as a whole, in developing our morals. However, religion is a very widespread term, and to be open minded you have to include radical religions into the mix, that might believe that killing in the name of their God is sensible. In that regard, religion would be damaging our society. But I'd say over the history of the world it's done more good than evil, but that's just my opinion so don't take it as a factual statement.

1 point

Well it depends what you're going for. Sometimes it's relatable when a movie ends in a way similar to the real world, without a fairy tale ending, you know, and they all lived happily ever after (One example would be Manchester By The Sea, great flick, but not if you want to be uplifted necessarily). But at the same time, movies help us express ideas about the future/past that are entertaining to add our imagination to, so yes, I'd say they are primarily made to expand upon reality.

1 point

Well if they're drowning in a very dangerous situation where if I jump in to help I will mostly likely endanger my life too, then I'd say it's less of my responsibility, but obviously I would still try to get a pole or something to help them

Imagination(25) Clarified
1 point

I think the point is that there is no answer that is so correct that there is no probability of anything else being correct. Like saying 1 + 1 = 2, that statement has no probability to it, it's just 100% true, but as soon as things get remotely complicated, like answering why we are here, you must answer things in terms of probability

Imagination(25) Clarified
1 point

So in your opinion, if we were not present, the universe would be meaningless? At least from our perspective, I think that makes sense.

1 point

I would rather that come from a mutual dialogue through love and kindness

I agree. I think regardless of what you think, it's more important to not be offended of what others think (unless it involves violence), and to be able to have a rational discussion of why they think what they think and why you think what you think. We should all be able to agree on at least this much.

2 points

The death penalty is not unjustified, while abortion is unjustified, from the fetus's perspective, considering that it should have a right to a life. That is the key difference. An innocent fetus has a right to life, while someone who has done something so heinous that they are considered a danger to exist in society, has lost their right to live. Obviously that is such a severe punishment that it is reserved for people who have seriously damaged society.

1 point

There's multiple perspectives you could look at this from.

-One, is to say that be moral to at least stay in society. A sane human being wants to succeed in

life, and part of that includes not getting kicked out of a society (i.e. put in a prison, executed)

-If you believe that a higher being created us and commands us to follow a moral code, you can

assume that said being has reasons for telling us to follow those morals. Therefore, if we could

discover the reason for the morals to exist, which I think we can through experimentation, then

I'd say that's a much more satisfactory way of telling someone why to be moral than to tell them

that if they don't they will be punished in the afterlife for eternity

1 point

Example Argument: No, we do not know enough about our world to know 100% without a doubt why we are here. No matter what you believe, there will always be a chance that you are wrong.

1 point

Example Argument: Yes, through faith you can fully understand why we are here and can explain that answer to someone who doesn't understand

Displaying 3 most recent debates.

Winning Position: Train Moral Dilemma
Winning Position: Yes
Winning Position: Yes, you can

About Me


"Undergraduate student at Texas A&M;University who recently gained a love for debating things."

Biographical Information
Name: Cameron Davies
Gender: Male
Age: 18
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Republican
Country: United States
Religion: Agnostic
Education: In College

Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here