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.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS MattyB

Reward Points:22
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:9
Debates:3
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
9 most recent arguments.
1 point

I am against the statement: "Violent computer games are responsible for aggressive behavior in teenagers"

"As we see, before all this violent video/computer games were created, there was not even one case where a teenager becomes violent and dangerous to other people which can even lead to deaths of innocent people."

There isn't any evidence of this life before video games, when teenagers committed no crimes and behaved themselves in a proper and good way. Then by logic we can most definitely assume that violence in humans, and this includes teenagers, has not been created by video games. Violent teenagers and adults are formed by society, not by DOOM.

"reward system like when we kill 10 people, we get a bonus or when we kill 50 people and so. So, kids who are always playing violent games will soon enough get used to this reward system hence trying to apply it to real life."

If someone applies a reward system to real life, they must have underlying mental issues. Playing games 24/7 will only affect your physical health, not your ability to commit crimes.

"Then, the media soon told the public that the two teenagers often played violent video games such as DOOM and others. Hence this really do prove that violent video games are responsible for aggressive behavior in children and teenagers."

The point is that the media wouldn't have bothered telling you that if they had done something to help the school. They didn't focus on the poor upbringing they may/may not have had.

"Hence this really do prove that violent video games are responsible for aggressive behavior in children and teenagers."

In summary, statistics can be used to correlate any two factors. Like the number of successful marriages and the month in which the marriage took place (plucked it out of my head). A minority, and it is a very very small minority, of gamers are violent. The same can be said of society as a whole.

1 point

I have never met someone who has been prompted to cause violence due to video games. The cases given of teenagers murdering taxi drivers and other horrific crimes are explained by one important and relevant fact: Violent people are violent from the outset. The fact they play games is totally irrelevant.

"Violent computer games are responsible for aggressive behavior in teenagers"

"responsible" - so, video games are the sole reason why aggressive behavior exists in modern society? No. The media has fooled people into believing this. The vast majority of gamers are peaceful, calm and rational people. The very very small minority are aggressive.

Look at it this way. The media will only report on the murders and robberies, and if it so happens they played video games, it becomes common knowledge. If a person who gives their own time to charity is reported upon, no-one gives two hoots if they play video games.

OK, so some games are violent. I play violent games (yes, I am a teenager). I enjoy playing games, violent or not. But I have not had the urge to commit crimes, or aggressive behavior.

Perhaps it's the upbringing, dare I say it. Perhaps it's the global society that we, the West, are brought up in. Perhaps it's the way media reports on violence. Look at the rest of the picture, there's no link between them.

Games with violent aspects, say Borderlands or Bulletstorm,(both of which sparked complaints) aren't provoking anyone to violence. Those who believe playing a violent game leads to violent acts are not seeing it through our eyes:

There is an article, on a gaming website, that looks at this issue. Read the comments. Actually read what they have to say, because half of them say the video shown was powerful enough for them. These are the gamers who signed up to a gaming website - so they must be big fans of games, and almost certainly play violent games.

Rational people are safe with guns. Rational people are safe with knives. It's the irrational people you need to worry about, and thankfully these are in the minority.

Supporting Evidence: Gamers Aren't Violent : IGN (www.ign.com)
1 point

I did not need to watch the video to know this well established fact: the Government is a pile of . Any government. And we are told to despise and look down on countries like Russia, Iran and China for having so-called "corrupt" leaders, when we ourselves are living in a similar situation. Take the UK government for example. A few days back a politician called a policeman a "pleb". Those who don't understand this word should be told it means " a commoner ". Today, our Prime Minister, David Cameron, reveals there will be no inquiry into the matter.

We are only told the true meaning of events after the whole event simmers down, and then no-one can be bothered doing anything about it.

Take TV licenses. We in the UK have to pay a TV license (around £145 a year) if we want to watch TV. This applies to any device capable of showing TV. ALL this money goes to the BBC - so this is effectively a state-owned, state-controlled TV and Radio company.

And then there's the watching. The constant watching of every single move. Both in real life and on the Internet. My emails, texts, phone messages and basically everything I don't send by cup and string - monitored.

Then there's the wars across the globe. I don't truly know why we are there. And besides, how am I supposed to believe the TV company that the government gives our money to?

And finally - the big old promises they make come election time, that once they're in office, get wiped off the board and replaced by the initiatives which will allow them to make more money. They promised to fix the debts and all the rest of the bull. Instead, they have dug the hole deeper and borrowed even more money.

But in the end, what is there we can do about it? We can't vote for None of the Above, since the governments control the voting methods. We can't suddenly decide that the government is robbing us blind and we'd like our money back. I may be an idealistic teenager but I cannot understand why some people still sit and watch their countries being destroyed from within.

And with that, I stop my rant. Thank You.

1 point

Terrible. Then again, if the economy was in a bad position with any PM, we'd hate them too.

1 point

It is the built-in human "emotion" of intrigue and curiosity which has driven us (literally) to where we are now. If you believe in a god, (which I don't) then surely you will know that god created us, and therefore gave us all the things we required. So, s/he gave us the sense of intrigue. Therefore, it seems only logical to say that god wanted us to question things. And atheism is the only belief which allows us to do that.

So atheism is the religion of logic and reasoning. Therefore it is not a cop out.

And I still don't know why we are taught religion in school.

MattyB(22) Clarified
1 point

Sorry, I mean solve current issues. The topic is whether or not revolution is the best path, rather than governments solving the issues. I guess it covers a lot of issues - war, economy etc - so it is a little vague.

1 point

I think that revolutions are the only way to go about this. Whether or not you are employed, times are hard and the choices ahead of you in this capitalist society are hardly appealing. Perhaps the best solution is revolution. Change what has been done and try and mend this mess of a world. I don't believe the governments, doing what they are doing or plan to do, are going to get anywhere. Both the US' and UK's (and I imagine every country's) debt has increased, despite a promise to reduce it and increase growth. We need to reset the global situation and get a grip of ourselves. The future, as they say, is in our hands.

1 point

As said in numerous comments above - the Euro is failing alongside the Dollar, although half of us don't realise. In all honesty, I hope the whole thing comes crashing down around our heads - it'll give us a chance to reset the mess of a global economy. Thing is - once one goes, and it will, the rest will follow seeing as we have a flawed capitalist economy and governments willing to spend every last penny, then some more.

Countries say they can pay back loans, promptly get into debt - no-one cares since they said they could pay it back. If I (an unemployed student) could go to the bank and say "Yeah, I can pay it back,", the world would end. Look at these CIA figures on national debt, and try to act surprised. The inevitability of the whole thing is crazy, and yet the governments still think they can sort it. It will not be sorted. Anyone - and I mean anyone - who thinks the US, Spain, UK or anyone on the negative end of that list can repay their money, is an absolute maniac.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2187rank.html?countryName=United%20States&countryCode;=us®ionCode;=noa&rank;=192#us

- It didn't work putting it below

1 point

I agree massively on this level. I guess this is why I thought RT was a legit station - but obviously it is not. I could probably say that watching the news station of your country (for me this would be the BBC, the UK government-funded news station) and that of another (RT), you could probably come to somewhere in the middle. I think the debate could have any news channel at the core, and the results would be the same.

Displaying 3 most recent debates.

Winning Position: Yes

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


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