BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Ruthlessness is a positive thing in politics.

ArgumentI will attempt to show how being ruthless in politics is not a good strategy as it often ends up proving to be an unsuccessful approach in the long term. ExamplesAdolf Hitler: Hitler is a prime example of a person who went too far in order to achieve their own personal goals. In the prelude to WWII, Hitler went to any means necessary to make both himself and Germany the most dominant in the world. This included lying to Neville Chamberlain at the Munich Accord when he pledged that he would not wage war on another nation only to invade Prague a year later and breaking the non-aggression pact that he had signed with the Soviet Union in 1941 by invading with 3.8 million Axis troops. Despite this ruthless approach, Hitler and Nazi Germany failed in their attempts at dominance and shows how political ruthlessness often fails in the long term [1]. Napoleon Bonaparte: Napoleon was very ruthless, both militarily and politically. Militarily because he single handedly revolutionized warfare in Europe and politically because he led a famous Cou D'etat and crowned himself Emperor of France. This however proved to be a fatal mistake as eventually the entire of Europe formed a Coalition against him and eventually defeated him at Waterloo and exiled him to St. Helena in 1815 [2]. Richard Nixon: Nixon's ruthlessness came from his paranoia and his need to have secret information. The ever infamous Watergate Scandal is a perfect example of how this ruthlessness eventually will prove to be unsuccessful. While the secret tapes that Nixon kept in the Oval Office may have proved to be useful on some occasion, they also were certainly the biggest mistake of Nixon's career as it led to his imeachment and resignation as president [3]. ConclusionPolitical ruthlessness appears to be a positive strategy in the short term and will produce results. However, given the many historical examples it has been shown that it is generally unwise to be completely ruthless in a politics as often times it does not work out in the long term. Sources[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Ruthlessness is a positive thing in politics.

This debate will be about if ruthlessness is a positive or a negative attribute in politics.This debate is in the philosphy category which means that the arguments will mostly be based on own ideas, of course is it allowed to use factual arguments but the debate is mean to be a more ideal debate and both sides should stick to that principle.Pro/For: Consider that ruthlessness is a positive thing in politics.Con/Against: Consider that ruthlessness is a negative thing in politics (the argument that it's either way is not accepted). The debate structure will be that:round 1 for acceptance,round 2 for arguments,round 3 for rebuttalsand round 4 for conclusion and rebuttals. Ruthlessness: Being able to do what it takes to reach your goals and interests, by every possible (legal) way.
Should women be able to play sports with men

I am doing this for a school essay, so i'll just put my opinion out there. I believe that we as women should be allowed to play male sports now many say that women may get hurt doing their type of sports but even the things we do are harmful, or that maybe we are puny,or we aren't as strong as men but we are as equal as they are and we can become just as strong. Now if we as women want to play those sports that means we are ready to take the tackling and i mean men have played in cheer-leading we should be allowed too. We can take the heat, now me personally i play volleyball and we get just as many bruises we lay out and dive and spike and bruise our wrists and arms and the bruises on our hips make us look like we get beat at home.
wity fool is better than a foolish wit

there's no point in comparing br'er fox with witty fool he always used to lost because of his wicked intentions,he was not a fool but transformed himself into a fool courtesy his corrupted objectives my opponent says a foolish wit can cover up his mistake well here's the solution lies - a wit will do everything in a flawless manner but once he commits mistake he'll be termed as an foolish wit because he'll never be able to correct it thinking that he is right. accepted that he'll use his best of the best brains in order to disguise it but he does not know the witty fool sitting in front of him is more intelligent that he has been revealed everything despite foolish wit's conceals okay , tell me does a wise person(witty fool) ever flaunts his knowledge??????? on the other hand an ostentatious person(foolish wit) always flaunts his so called acumen and is very good at blowing off his own trumpet . take a practical example who is in a better position X who always take part in class discussion plus carries a good impression on all the teachers or Y who actually proves himself by scoring in exams therfore , foolish wit means a person who is witty in the eyes of outsiders but in fact is a foolish person like in that old tale of hare and tortoise,hare being intelligent in racing but proved to be a fool int he end. while witty fool is a person like tortoise who never exposed his acumen brer rabbit is a perfect example of this category hence verified WITY FOOL IS BETTER THAN A FOOLISH WIT
wity fool is better than a foolish wit

My opponent has agreed on the definitions I have posted, thus we will apply them to this debate. I understand my definitions seem very unoriginal but that's what the Oxford dictionary states. It is very difficult to reword several phrases in the resolution because very few words show the exact meaning, thus I resolved to using the same phrase repeatedly. So I apologize for this coincidence. If any of the voters has done high school NFL policy debate I suppose you knew the crucial skill of seeking flaws on evidence. I wish to sharpen these skills online before the next debate season begins. Attacking Pro's refutals: Definition: witty- showing or characterized by quick and inventive verbal humor 1. "i have intentionally used wity instead of witty so as to highlight the acumen of witty fool who is wity but not witty but trying to be witty. " Please elaborate, I need some explanations for the last few words. Bottom line: is the guy witty? 2. Now as for his challenge: who is in a better position -a half witted person,a`witless person or a witty person? First Pro takes up the entire debating ground, thus leaving little or none for Con to debate on because there most options lead to a witty fool. Second this question simply has no direct link regarding being better than a foolish wit, thus it has no relevance to the topic and cannot be considered as a major voting issue. Third if I committed a foolish wit then I would had directly answered it, using one of the three choices, without knowing it's an unfair trap (reasoned above). He has posted this question and fails to conceal its intention. Either way from the looks my opponent's refutal and my case, if I had done a foolish wit and responded using one of his options then my lengthy reasoning would had cover up the hole(links to NC Contention 1). Bottom line is: Foolish wits can always be covered up cleverly but a witty fool fails cover his intentions. Voting issues: 1. None of Con's challenges have not been answered. 2. I have listed my reasons above in round 1 and 2, I have proven that a foolish wit is better than a witty fool. 3. A witty fool is a funny idiot. A foolish wit can be used as a valuable lesson. For example: What do we learn from Ber Rabbit's victims such as Ber Fox, etc? Which one is more valuable? 4. I have completely attacked my opponent's case. Pro's case falls and Con's still stands. In conclusion for the reasons listed please vote Con. I apologize for such a longer response than Pro. Thank you and I look forward towards Pro's refutations.
wity fool is better than a foolish wit

well so as to correct my so called witty opponent, one doesn't need a dictionary meaning of the words rather a better understanding to let penetrate a dictum into one's brains. no doubt con has very correctly defined all the words used in the debating topic which is a cliched thing . so if he loves correcting mistakes,let his this prowess should augment by knowing that , i have intentionally used wity instead of witty so as to highlight the acumen of witty fool who is wity but not witty but trying to be witty. well ,forget it it would seem to you as bombardment,afterall you require lengthy ................... okay if you answer me this simple question i'll accept you as a winner of this debate be honest enough who is in a better position -a half witted person,a`witless person or a witty person
My opponent will contradict him/her self.

Uh..... you are supposed to respond to the questions with a yes or no answer for each. I will continue... 1. Is this question 1?2. Will you answer "no" to question 3?3. Was your answer to question 2 a "yes" or a "no"?4. Was your answer to question 1 a "yes"?5. Have you or will you use the answer "yes" 3 times total this round?
IVF Debate

In conclusion, IVF treatment may have beneficial progress toward our understanding of the human genome and may even influence our medical technology for the greater good, however this does not outweigh the current drawbacks to costs, side effects, errors, and whether or not it could be a successful treatment. Even if there was a placement of multiple embryos, there is still a very good chance the pregnancy could result in multiple pregnancies, given that 20-30 percent are multiple pregnancies. By using IVF there may be side effects which occur. These could vary but typically ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome. Because ovaries are stimulated to produce more than one egg, the hormones and drugs used can lead to this syndrome due to an imbalance of normal FSH. Moreover, even after for paying for blood tests, screening, and materials, it can add up, even with the IVF treatment procedures and multiple cycles if the procedure fails. The process could be highly stressful on the patients who decide to partake in the treatment. Most of the time, it can be hard to see a loved one go through the cycles and screening that may occur as numerous results could lead to implications, no progress, and expenses that must be paid even if the couple or person"s treatment was not successful. High estrogen levels associated with high stimulation of IVF shows signs of increasing the chance for a baby to have a premature birth accompanied by low birth weight. There is a connection between this and long term health problems for the child in the future. The high estrogen levels has been shown to affect the intrauterine environment. The selection of embryos may prove it is unethical as parents are virtually selecting their child"s genes and preventing any genetic diseases that may take place. This essentially creates a perfect baby in which can seem immoral as a birth should be natural rather than selecting genes. The success of IVF is not guaranteed and typically people have to undergo more than one cycle of treatment before they are successful. As of right now, just over 25% of IVF treatments result in a live birth. With this we would also be progressing toward a society which is only seeking a child's genotype rather than their unique characteristics which they behold by the natural reproduction process. "(847) 662-1818." Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome After IVF. Advanced Fertility Center of Chicago, 4 Nov. 2012. Web. 27 Apr. 2016. Agrawal, Arpit. "What Advantages and Disadvantages Are There to in Vitro Fertilization?" - Quora. Quora, 6 May 2014. Web. 27 Apr. 2016. "The Advantages and Disadvantages of IVF." The UK's Pioneering Fertility Clinics. Createfertility. Web. 27 Apr. 2016. Abuzeid, Mostafa I. "Advantages and Disadvantages of IVF Treatments." IVF MICHIGAN ROCHESTER HILLS & FLINT, PCDr. Mostafa Abuzeid. Michigan Infertility Expert, 8 Dec. 2015. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.
IVF Debate

To review, IVF is a method or procedure for people who cannot create a baby by natural means, making it very beneficial to those who are infertile. Most IVF Clinics grow multiple eggs in the woman through injection of fertility drugs ("Why Choose IVF?"). Following that, the eggs are removed by laparoscopic surgery. In a petri dish, the eggs and sperm are combined and incubated ("Why Choose IVF?"). The fertilized eggs are placed in a growth medium that allows them to divide ("Why Choose IVF?"). If they develop normally, some of them will be inserted into the woman's fallopian tube or implanted into the uterus ("Why Choose IVF?"). A person might undergo IVF after many unsuccessful attempts to get pregnant or after multiple miscarriages ("The Pros and Cons of IVF") IVF is very successful for those trying to conceive a child compared to attempts by natural means, as well as safer by preventing the transmission of certain STD's ("Why Choose IVF?"). Most side effects can be prevented with proper medication and hormone treatment ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). IVF procedures that help eliminate biological or infertility problems by manually combining egg and sperm to fertilize the egg, so a few side effects are worth it for most people ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). Sometimes cost can be an issue, so in order to reduce costs, several fertilized eggs are implanted at once, typically four ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). Multiple embryos attaching can be something the couple acknowledges when agreeing to the amount of eggs were fertilized and returned. If the couple does not want multiple children, they can try IVF with only one egg, or several times with one egg until it takes to ensure only one embryo will take ("Why Choose IVF?"). Genetic screening of embryos is beneficial because it can prevent birth defects. Also, it should be noted the possibility that knowledge gained from IVF would advance medicine in general, helping with prenatal care ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). By using IVF, it can greatly advance knowledge about the reproductive systems and how embryos develop ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). Also, IVF goes new insight to infertility and possible reasons why it happens ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). For individuals or couples, IVF is a very great procedure to allow the creation of life with their genetics for people who could not otherwise have biological children. People who do not agree with IVF have the choice to not complete the procedure, allowing it to be accessible for those that can complete the process. The Pros outweigh the Cons when looking at the bigger picture that it gives opportunities for people to reproduce if it will create happiness for the individual. Citations: Pros and Cons of In Vitro Fertilization: Costs, success rate, multiple births, egg storage. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.mamashealth.com... The Pros and Cons of IVF. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.pbs.org... Why choose IVF? (2012, January 20). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.lajollaivf.com...
IVF Debate

As genetic screening may be a benefit for a leap in technological innovation and knowledge, it still doesn't hide the problem as to discarding embryos that are not beneficial for the patients who participate. Moral issues surround this, as the embryo can be though of as a human being or a possible chance of life in which will be disposed simple because there is a problem with the genetic makeup. In fact, many can argue that human reproduction is a gift and any form of selection can lead to speculations about a child being 'manufactured' rather than allowing the human reproduction cycle take its natural course. Moreover, by allowing us to gain an insight on disease and treating it before live birth, some may argue that we will be moving toward a society where we value children for their genotype rather than unique, individual characteristics. Robertson, John A. "Human Reproduction." Extending Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: The Ethical Debate. Oxford Journals, 18 July 2003. Web. 02 May 2016.
IVF Debate

Genetic screening of embryos can be beneficial because it can prevent birth defects. Also, it should be noted the possibility that knowledge gleaned from IVF would advance medicine in general, helping with prenatal care, for example ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). By using IVF, it can greatly advance knowledge about the reproductive systems and how embryos develop ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). Also, IVF goes new insight to infertility and possible reasons why it happens ("The Pros and Cons of IVF").
IVF Debate

Before an IVF procedure, patients agree to the cost and side effects for the possibility for the creation of human life ("Why Choose IVF?"). Multiple embryos attaching can be something the couple acknowledges when agreeing to the amount of eggs were fertilized and returned. If the couple does not want multiple children, they can try IVF with only one egg, or several times with one egg until it takes to ensure only one embryo will take ("Why Choose IVF?").
IVF Debate

By partaking in the selection of specific eggs and embryos, many can conclude that this process of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is unethical as it determines if a child may have a genetic disease that could ultimately influence their birth. By removing a cell from an IVF embryo to test it, one may conclude that this could present an opportunity to create a perfect baby eliminating the natural process. Indeed the cost may be reduced, however, after paying for blood tests to determine hormone levels, any current body problems or problems that may affect treatment, and paying for medication before and after the treatment, the cost will add up. This is also not including the treatment of implanting and possibly freezing eggs or embryos in a lab. Furthermore, IVf treatments are very stressful for couples or for a future parent. After going through cycles of treatment and screening, it can be hard to see a loved one go through this process and even if treatments are unsuccessful patients still must pay for it. Agrawal, Arpit. "What Advantages and Disadvantages Are There to in Vitro Fertilization?" - Quora. Quora, 6 May 2014. Web. 27 Apr. 2016. "The Advantages and Disadvantages of IVF." The UK's Pioneering Fertility Clinics. Createfertility. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.
IVF Debate

Although that may be true, IVF is still much more successful for patients than trying to conceive naturally ("Why Choose IVF?"). During IVF, multiple embryos are implanted to make sure at least one egg takes ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). There are some side effects, but all are temporary during the short time during IVF ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). Most side effects can be prevented with proper medication and hormone treatment ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). IVF procedures that help eliminate biological or infertility problems by manually combining egg and sperm to fertilize the egg, so a few side effects are worth it for most people ("The Pros and Cons of IVF"). Sometimes cost can be an issue, so in order to reduce costs, several fertilized eggs are implanted at once, typically four ("The Pros and Cons of IVF").
IVF Debate

Currently for the treatment of IVF, it is typically not very successful as there is a a twenty-five percent chance of a live birth. Moreover, patients utilizing the IVF treatments have to undergo more than one cycle of treatment as the first round may not be effective due to poor implantation and unsuccessful egg fertilization. Because ovaries are stimulated to produce more than one egg, the hormones and drugs used can lead to the syndrome of ovarian hyper-stimulation hormone due to an imbalance of the normal hormone FSH (follicle stimulating hormone). This results in dark urine rapid weight gain, persistent nausea and vomiting, shortness of breath, and decreased urination. Thus, the insertion of multiple eggs can have a negative impact on the patient. "The Advantages and Disadvantages of IVF." The UK's Pioneering Fertility Clinics. Createfertility. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.
IVF Debate

In Vitro Fertilization is a method or procedure for people who are infertile or cannot create a baby by natural means. Most IVF Clinics grow multiple eggs in the woman through injection of fertility drugs ("Why Choose IVF?"). Following that, the eggs are removed by laparoscopic surgery. In a petri dish, the eggs and sperm are combined and incubated ("Why Choose IVF?"). The fertilized eggs are placed in a growth medium that allows them to divide ("Why Choose IVF?"). If they develop normally, some of them (usually four) will be inserted into the woman's fallopian tube or implanted into the uterus("Why Choose IVF?"). This is very beneficially for most people, as it is very successful and gives the opportunity of any individual or couple to have a baby("Why Choose IVF?").A person might undergo IVF after many unsuccessful attempts to get pregnant or after multiple miscarriages ("The Pros and Cons of IVF")
Abortion up to the Second Trimester Should Be Legalized.

I applaud my opponent for his quick response and interesting arguments. =====Counterarguments===== "Stating that something should be legalized up to an N-th degree lends itself to arguing that N 1 should either be, or should remain, illegal." ----> This indeed may be implied, but it does not state so necessarily. As your analogy of legalizing heroine: most would deduce that when you say you legalize up to 3 grams you also mean to not legalize anything over that limit. And that's a fair deduction. However, it is not fair to say that you have also necessarily decided to be against legalizing 10 kilos, and in my case, abortion of the third trimester. At best, you are just trying to deconstruct the semantics of the debate title. That being said, I'll go through whatever other arguments he has that doesn't center around this. 1. The Court's Decision Concerning the possibility of a fetus being viable from weeks 24-26: I concede the point that the Court finds it illegal to abort a fetus from weeks 24-26. However, my stance does not change. Any such "viable fetus" can be and should be able to be aborted until after the second trimester. This is because not only does the fetus not have a fully developed brain (i.e. not self-aware, conscious,etc.) it also can't feel pain since the necessary neural networks haven't developed yet. "If, in the future, medical advances in incubation are made which allow a fetus to survive outside the womb after only 10 weeks, it would be illegal to abort a fetus at even 10 weeks." ----> Which, then, I would argue against. Unless medical advanced allow the fetus to develop pain receptors and a developed brain (i.e. make it grow faster), then it should be illegal to abort it. However, looking into the future without a clear picture of when such sciences will develop is irrelevant. This debate concerns medical findings and laws that are active as of now. 2. Abortion isn't murder My opponent's argument fails because he doesn't seem to understand the difference between a "person" and a "human". Common definitions of a person is an individual human being - a human being is a biological being called Homo Sapien. However, in philosophical terms, a person is one who is rational and capable of making judgements (thus granting them ethical responsibility, etc.). A fetus, without a working brain, can NOT do any of these things and thus abortion is NOT murder. In fact, unknown aliens can be counted as persons also - it is not human exclusive. =====Conclusion===== Unfortunately I have to keep my responses short as time is not on my side for these past few weeks. However, I praise my opponent for his interesting arguments and I hope the vote goes fairly (which it will most likely not). Cheers!