Technology is killing the quality of the human spirit.

I'm afraid I don't share my opponent's sentiments. I'll keep my opening round fairly short, as my opponent has not elaborated much of a proper argument yet. This debate is centrally around whether technology causes a loss of human quality. I argue that technology is how people manifest a laziness that might have some other cause. In particular, I argue that laziness itself is inherant to human nature, and thus we, not our inventions, are the murderers of our own spirits. I also argue that technology enables you to exercise human qualities in superior ways to what has ever been possible in the past. Definitions Imagination, problem solving skills, reason, mental organisation, spirituality, and social skills have been so far defined as examples of human qualities. From these I will draw out the rule that a human quality is any mental ability that can be learnt. The opposite of this I deem to be laziness, the non-exercise of mental ability. I will define technology, based on the affirmative's opening case, to be any practical application of the electronic sciences. Rebuttal What my opponent needs to do, to substantiate any of his arguments, is show why technology caused the problem. All of his arguments so far are examples of how people use technology to be lazy. They do not tell us why those people are lazy. To win this debate, my opponent must exclude the possibility that without technology, these people would still be lazy. Yes, the laziness would naturally be less manifest. Human spirit is, I think, prima face not elevated by the inability to manifest itself, if that human spirit were to be taken to include an element of laziness (as I will go on to show). Being lazy is more than just doing less to do an action ... it is also about doing less overall. I tend to think people today do more than people did back in our grandparent's day. For instance, look at working hours. Look at the type of labor - most labor back then was menial work, while today we are beyond that era, and can achieve more while doing less. That isn't laziness, that's symptoms of working smarter and harder. They're not mutually exclusive. Argument 1: Laziness a part of human nature If laziness was not an inherent part of human nature, communists would be ruling the world. Why? Because without external influence, a non-inherently-lazy person would be infinitely productive. Communism specifically precludes external influence. Therefore communism should not have failed. Yet it did. If laziness was not an inherent part of human nature, Fredrick Winslow Taylor's Scientific Management would be the norm. Why? Well, think about it. The only reason it failed was because not everyone could keep up with the work - they WANTED breaks and fair conditions. These can only be by-products of laziness - the willingness to work less hard. Laziness is quite useful. It avoids wasting excess energy and reduces your risk of exploitation. If laziness were not a part of human nature, I would be glad technology put it there. But given the vast number of pre-technology references to laziness, I think you'll find that one can be lazy for reasons other than technological ones. My opponent will not win this argument because he will not be able to prove laziness is caused by technology. Argument 2: Technology builds human qualities Imagination: Electronic music, graphic design and even many creative video games have allowed imagination to flourish in ways we would never have predicted. Most technology out there is derived from imagination as much as a pattern on a blanket is derived from the imagination. While there are rules, without imagination there can be no design. Problem Solving: Like computers don't have problems to solve!? Programming, some video games, everything creative, technical work such as networking, and many other information technology issues have a vast problem solving component. Reason: For goodness sake, you're using technology to reason right now! Mental Organization: Keeping mental track of hundreds of files, contacts, websites and other new data which older generations never needed to worry about is a huge feat of mental organisation. That's why old people, who didn't learn it as youths, have such trouble with it. Spirituality: Ever heard of the Church of Google? I rest my case. Social Skills: Society is a construct, and can be built around anything, including technology. Therefore using facebook or twitter efficiently is a social skill. Conclusions My opponent shows no conclusive causal link between laziness and technology, as he must do. He also does not show why technology is actually bad, on balance, and needs to respond to my analysis that technology can build the quality of the human spirit. For all of these reasons I am proud to negate.