Deaf vs. Blind

I commented without any reply that Round One's structure makes no sense because of the way that Pro is thought to go before Con. Due to this, I am taking the liberty of assuming that when it says 'Con' it means Pro in the structure.I shall not rebut the points directly but as one big point. The 'communication' and 'community' aspect are intertwined despite being different at face value. Both are based on the idea that more is better. To begin with, this is a qualitative debate, not a quantitative one. This means that this debate should revolve around the following form of research: Yet, in the entire debate put forth by Con, not a single deaf or blind person's feelings nor observations of their quality of lives is brought up.I will now explain why, in this qualitative debate, more is not better and the entire angle Con is using is not relevant.When you design a machine designed to communicate effectively with other beings and/or machines, you would design it to communicate via the least methods possible and with the least effort possible. The reason that this is true is because if you were, for instance, design a being that communicates outwards via sign language, text or speech and inwards via sign language and lip-reading or text the being would be wasting 2 methods that it has stored in its memory and had brain neurons wasted on maintaining the talent for every time that it spoke. On top of this, since very few people speak sign language and since people who were deaf (either from birth or prior to fully getting an accent) struggle much more than most to learn how to verbally communicate outwards as they cannot hear their own voice, only feel it. http://www.madsci.org... for lip-reading, even if all deaf people could lip read, it is estimated that lip-reading only allows around one third of a conversation to be understood due to words that don't involve lips being frequently spoken http://signlanguageco.com..., it can only really be done by someone who has not habits of touching their face, turning their head or in any way disruptiing the lip-reading process. http://www.deafwebsites.com...As for the argument that there are more deaf people than blind people and that this means they can socialize with more people. I firstly find it amusing that Con strongly insinuates that deaf people can only socialize with other deaf people since this seems to debate against their own side but since this is wrong for both deaf and blind people (as both can socialize with others, they just severely struggle to socialize directly deaf-to-blind person), I can dismiss the point on that angle alone. For the sake of thoroughness, I am going to take this a step further and point out that even if deaf only socialized with deaf and blind only socialized with blind, there is firstly the need for Con to prove that more socializing equals better social life (as opposed to quality socializing with a select few regularly) and secondly, Con needs to prove that humans have somehow overcome the estiamted psychological maximum of 150 friends (https://www.psychologytoday.com...).Now for some constructive arguments supporting the idea that blind people have it better than the deaf do. Communication is actually an interesting point; the blind not only can experience day-to-day communication with non-blind individuals a lot easier than deaf do as nothing such as 'sign language' needs to be learned by either party, but they can experience other aspects of communication that the deaf will simply never experience. This includes tone of voice, speed of talking and any other vocal elements. This can be countered by body language being a deaf-only experience but the blind can experience their communication over any medium (if you have text-to-voice software, even digital text becomes no barrier for the blind). On the other hand, body language can only be read in-person and not by any other means of communication.Following on from that, this highlights that the blind have more options in how they deal with other people. They can both text and voice chat due to text to voice software but voice-to-text software not only doesn't always pick up voices so well but deaf people simply don't annunciate everything correctly (meaning that it's a lot harder for them to compensate than blind people in life communications-wise).Blind people not only have to learn less in terms of means of communications (sign language, lip reading and how to talk) but they also don't have to try nearly as hard to justify their drawbacks to others. Deaf people can often seem either retarded or rude to people who do not know they are deaf due to not knowing how loud they are, not hearing anyone who talks to them for an angle they can't see and sounding like they can't talk properly (often people with Down's syndrome speak similarly to deaf people for totally different reasons https://www.down-syndrome.org...). Blind people are often obviously blind, either due to sunglasses (or their actual eyes never looking at a fixed spot as well as the lack of fully formed pupils.Blind people tend to have increased experience of both touch and hearing, deaf people only get increased sensitivity to sight, not to touch.https://www.sciencedaily.com...http://www.sciencedirect.com...These increased sensitivity allows blind peopl to remember both sounds and touches of scenarios and things a lot better than other humans and furthermore allows them to experience aspects that many don't (sight is a commonly focused sense in any given situation, it is why blindfolding is a much more enjoyed kink than earplugs) https://www.psychologytoday.com... highlights that the experience of the blind is in a way erotic and intriguing because of the unusual increased sensitivity they allow for touch and hearing. On the other hand, almost no one is turned on by wearing earplugs, not nobody just very few and this is because very few people feel like hearing is a mundane thing to have increased experience of.