CreateDebate


Debate Info

15
5
Yes, she was spot on! No, she was wrong!
Debate Score:20
Arguments:19
Total Votes:20
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes, she was spot on! (13)
 
 No, she was wrong! (5)

Debate Creator

addltd(5144) pic



Do you agree with Eleanor Roosevelt's Quote about Great, Average and Small Minds

Eleanore Roosevelt has a number of famous Quotes...the following being one of them.  Do you agree with her synopsis of Great, Average and Small Minds?

 

I bring this up due to the recent context around certain members acting out as trolls and the "feeding" of the trolls which has kept them around.  I would like to see if you agree that it is the simple minds who discuss people?

Yes, she was spot on!

Side Score: 15
VS.

No, she was wrong!

Side Score: 5
3 points

In light of what I have seen on here lately, it appears that this is a valid statement. The more people talk about "people" the more they seem to show that they have less capacity for real debate.

Side: Yes, she was spot on!
joecavalry(40163) Clarified
1 point

I just want to point out that the fact that the name "Eleanor Roosevelt" is included in the title and that the word "she" is included in the title of both options, makes it look like we are discussing the person, not the idea ;)

Also, it seems to me that a quote is an event.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it is hard, at best, to discuss ideas without delving into the other levels. So long as we don't wallow in those other levels, we should be OK ;)

Side: Yes, she was spot on!
1 point

Yes, but there's a difference on a debate site.

Here, we are trying to debate to find truth or objective superiority.

To do that, we need to bring up an idea, and back it up with real evidence, such as events or people or objects.

Right? But we still NEED an idea, or else we're just debating about events or people, which is boring.

Side: Yes, she was spot on!

One example of an idea that great minds discuss is self..., which happens to be my favorite topic ;)

Side: Yes, she was spot on!

Most people here seem to be stuck on politics and religion, which is about right. The average mind for this site is..., well..., average. Like the bell curve predicts ;)

Only a few are focused on drama ;)

Side: Yes, she was spot on!
Lynaldea(1231) Disputed
1 point

Hah! Yeah religion and politics are not necessary for the human mind. (sarcasm)

As much as I myself do not enjoy speaking on politics (it's boring), I have a great time speaking of religion and spirituality; I thoroughly enjoy it, and I believe religion and spirituality are extremely important to the human mind. Oh wait, spirituality is on the "greater mindset", that must mean I'm capable of going from a "greater mindset" to the "simple mindset", bypassing the "average mindset"...(not sarcasm), OR...I am also capable of going from the "simple mindset" and just chit chat and gossip, but wait! then when I want to speak of other things like science, philosophy, societal agenda and conflict, or the strategy behind sports (average mindset), or mother nature, or creativity and art; film and music; I went from simple mindedness to greater mindset in the "flip of a switch"....

And SO, perhaps I enjoy dabbling in all of the "mindsets" because I can. At least I'm being real and honest about the situation.

Unlike others on this board that enjoy keeping their levels to the average joe and/or small mindset, because they can and enjoy being what they are.

wink wink

Side: No, she was wrong!

It's generally true, though everyone talks about things in each category. What matters is how much you talk about each thing. No need to follow rules like never talking about your family because it would make you small minded.

Side: Yes, she was spot on!

Here is an idea worth discussing.

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ What isevil_3

Except that pirateelfdog got a jump on everyone else with his well crafted argument ;)

Side: Yes, she was spot on!
Side: Yes, she was spot on!
Supporting Evidence: http://www.vhemt.org/ (www.vhemt.org)
Side: Yes, she was spot on!

I agree

Side: Yes, she was spot on!
1 point

I so agree. Small minded people like to start stuff. .

Side: Yes, she was spot on!
1 point

Mhmm, of course I agree with him! He just called me a "Great mind"! :D

Side: Yes, she was spot on!
1 point

Great minds would try to make a change for what is bad. Small minds probably make things only worse. I agree with her. Alot.

Side: Yes, she was spot on!

People with small minds that want to discuss Eleanor instead, should post on this side. Brainiacs should post over there <--- ;)

Now that we got that taken care of, Eleanor was rather ugly; don't you think? That might explain why she was so smart. She basically just accepted the fact that she was ugly and thus spent most of her time thinking deep thoughts for people to remember her by ;)

Does anyone know if she was pompous? Do you find that deep thinkers tend to be pompous? Can someone quote me, "Deep thinkers are pompous." I want to be remembered as a deep thinker..., wait... ;)

Side: No, she was wrong!
1 point

The opposite to 'great minds', in the context we usually use it (meaning geniuses), is 'weak minds' e.g. stupid people. She has chosen the things that she likes to talk about and claimed them to be what intelligent people talk about. I don't believe that people who talk about different things than Eleanor Roosevelt and her ilk are stupid.

Side: No, she was wrong!

I disagree strongly. There tends to be a great arrogance around many philosophers, that believe that their opinions, their ideas, their interests are more important than anyone elses. Their happinesses are greater, their depressions deeper, and their existence more meaningful, simply because they can look down on other people.

I have seen people who I have little respect for, that have little capacity for critical and reasonable thought (a 'small' mind) discuss philosophy, theism, and other similar ideas. I have seen very intelligent people (a 'great' mind) discuss other people, gossip and tease.

I am against any idea of ranking people in such absolute ways. People, their opinions and their minds are much more complex and varied and diverse than any simplistic comparison will be able to show. Most people are capable of so much more than they often demonstrate, if you only give them a chance and a prompt to express themselves properly.

Side: No, she was wrong!
1 point

I don't agree in any way. It appears that the more abstract you think about the world the cleverer you are in her paradigm. To beat her in her own game I basically would have to talk about nothing but prime numbers my whole life without knowing how to open a door to be the greatest mind ever.

That she thinks great minds talk a lot about abstract ideas I think is more or less coincidental and may just be a result of a confirmation bias than anything else. So in a sense, she is a slave to her own idea that greats minds are slaves to ideas.

Side: No, she was wrong!