BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
There is no such thing as an answer, An "answer" to a question is just a belief.

Were your eyes man-made? No. I should have specified. Man-Made! Well, You still have two eyes. One just doesn't work properly or at all. So therefore your problem is inadequate. Though your field of vision may be different. You can still see, smell, hear, taste and feel. Maybe that eyeball argument doesn't work so much after all. Lets state one thing: Man-made. Thank you." Thank you for that, I had a tremendous laugh. Well, eyeballs were developed a loooong time ago, before we were even human. The environment created our eyeballs through a long serious of genetic variation, natural selection and adaptive processes. What does man made have to do anything? Truth and answers can be independent from man. Much like the 1+1=2. Although you could say 1+1=2 with different symbols, but... all symbols are merely created so we're able to communicate and perceive the universe in an organized manner. The parable I laid before you was to give you physical proof that answers and truth exist, you ripped your eyeball out. Now your field of vision has changed or is lacking completely, What this means is that we can answer the question, "what happens if I remove one or both of my eyes". You're eyeball is missing, now its harder for you to see. This points to the fact that things are answerable. 2-1=1.... The 2 part is two eyeballs, the -1 is the removing of 1 of those two eyeballs, and the = 1 symbolizes the the only eye you have left.. 1+1 will always be 2 ok? This is kindergarten math. It can be done over and over and over and over... We know for a fact that when we ask ourselves 1+1 what the result will be. Truth is something that can be verified and tested several times. It is a constant, never changing...... Lets state one last thing- If you're going to throw scripture at me please... Save my time and yours. Your good book is the farthest thing from being able to be claimed an answer, it doesn't belong in conversation that attempts to bring forth knowledge or facts. I could careless about religion at all, unless it is put in contrast with truth,facts, answers. Truth is irrefutable. one is one. two is two. three is three. etc.
There is no such thing as an answer, An "answer" to a question is just a belief.

Were your eyes man-made? No. I should have specified. Man-Made! Well, You still have two eyes. One just doesn't work properly or at all. So therefore your problem is inadequate. Though your field of vision may be different. You can still see, smell, hear, taste and feel. Maybe that eyeball argument doesn't work so much after all. Lets state one thing: Man-made. Thank you.
There is no such thing as an answer, An "answer" to a question is just a belief.

Well... MY brain hurts so I will end this swiftly.... So you say, "There is no such thing as an answer, An "answer" to a question is just a belief". Well some answer can be right as I will prove, Do me a favor, Hold up both of your index fingers, now slowly let them gravitate toward your eyeball..... good, good... Nice... Keep going... stop until they are about 1 cm from your eyes.... Now.... I want you to take one finger.... If you believe in the number one..... Its pretty concrete... But.. w/e.. Anyhow, Take one finger and rip one eyeball out. How many fingers did it take for you to rip that eyeball out? And how many eye's to you have left? Well..... If you did as I instructed and I hope you did, you only have one eyeball in your head now. Your field of vision has changed, its a lot different from the field of vision you had when you had "two" eyes isn't it? Well that's because you did this 2-1=1. And you definitely found out that there is a certain concreteness to things. And that you could actually use the symbols 1 and 2 and 3 to put a face on things in order to describe what happened.. You have something called words, which are nothing more than symbols used to express the essential meaning of something. You took one finger and ripped one eye out.
There is no such thing as an answer, An "answer" to a question is just a belief.

Okay so what is 1+1 ? People may say 2. How do you know that answer is right? How do you truly know? That "answer" is man-made. Anything man-made can have errors. Just like anything in the bible. Atheists or Agnostics may ask a question such as, How do we really know there is a GOD? People BELIEVE GOD exists. Others BELIEVE there is no GOD. The "answer" to that question or questions along those lines is a belief NOT a truly correct answer. As a Christian anything in the bible is truth because, it is not man-made answers. Those answers were made by GOD and GOD is perfect therefore that means GOD answers are perfect because he is perfect. And when something is perfect it is right. Just like the question I asked about what 1+1 equals. You believe the answer is 2. but, is it? If you answer that question it is a belief. You may have theories about 1+1 equaling 2 but, how would you know that answer is truly right? It is a man-made answer. Be nice, Have fun and keep the language clean. I hope you dont take anything I put, to offense.
Why TJ should die (rapist)

I do not mean to be rude but are you dumb???? Being raped is not something you forget or move on! You get raped you feel violated and you think everybody can see through you and they would be judging you. Every way you turn you think that they are laughing at you and whispering about you because of what happened. Your self esteem goes down the tubes. You think you can forget things I would like to see you try. Nobody forgets about things like that. Not the mother not the police and defiantly not the victim! The reason he should be exiled is because why cause more harm to anyone else why ruin someone else's life until there death. Why would you let him get away if all he is going to do after that is ruin others life's people regret making a decision especially those who got raped. Coltina was walking home that day and took a short cut that is where he got her. She is terrified of that place ever since that happened. People don't forget . Tell me anyone who wants to comment or even you had gotten raped or physically abused would you forget? yes or no?
Why TJ should die (rapist)

Innocent until proven guilty my friend. If a rape did actually occur, the forensics lab would be able to id this guy's DNA and attribute the rape to him. Even if this guy did rape these girls, he is a dirt bag, but death is too harsh of a sentence. He made three big mistakes but are these mistakes big enough to cost him the most valuable thing he has? I am certain that with the proper help, these girls can move on. He did not take their lives why should the government take his?
Why TJ should die (rapist)

No I'm not dumb but I can see that you are in an emotional state of mind. Moving on is not the same as forgetting it ever happened. I never said forget in my argument. You are making things up. If I killed your mother in a drunk driving car crash would I deserve death? If a rapist damages individuals mentally forever does he deserve death? I think the purpose of this debate in the first place was to vent your anger at this guy whoever he is. And if they did not have enough evidence to put him away I wouldn't consider him a rapist until he is convicted.
All schools should have a Debate club/activity.

The reason why I have already one the debate is because pro has not gave any sources for his claim. This means that we are trusting his own "experience". He has not gave any evidence that is experience is valid, so why should we trust him. I on the other hand have provided sources, and statistics to prove my point. Just because it worked out in his school doesn't mean that it will work out in every school. My opponent only provided what would work in his school. That is why I am saying that debate clubs should only be in schools that out perform others. Pleasing just 10 students out of 400 kids is a challenge that I don't think will hold up with the faculty of the school. You also said that it took 3 years for the faculty to get it running. That means that other schools that are doing poorly won't accept his proposal. I hope that the voter will also look at these arguments objectively.
All schools should have a Debate club/activity.

Ok you basically said the same thing the part of kids working on homework less than one hour a week has nothing to with it 70% of teachers not caring about students has little to do with it because at least at are school the debate club is really controlled by the students. and again with the out performing school little schools can have clubs to you know that all it is a club thats what the question says and thats what it is to be debated all schools can have a club and debate club if you where not aware of it is a club so you stop with your point of only out performing school should have this. Yes about the football and soccer point i know that did little justice it was just there as a conjecture to your state of debate club is only for the moronity i play soccer myself. its your last chance to win i would try to think of something i did not already disprove.
All schools should have a Debate club/activity.

I don't want anyone to interpret my argument into anything I didn't think it to be. I think it is a good ideal to have, but I think that people won't get into it. You can look at the hardcore facts. The average student spends less than an hour a week on his homework. 70% of teachers don't care about these students. That is why I think we should give these debate programs to schools that will at least use them properly. Also you mentioned the football and soccer argument. Those sports please number of kids that are greater than the number of kids that would want to debate. You would be referred to as cool if you excel in them. We should be able to give these debate programs to the more professional qualified schools. The schools where the teachers actually care. I like the idea of all schools having a debate program, but it just pleases a little minority that schools probably are not going to take seriously.
All schools should have a Debate club/activity.

i disagree with some of the thing you have stated i don't think debate club would meaningless, and i never said that everyone had to participate its a club and only the students that want to take the club take the club its that simple, and about the part you said about the minority and how you say its a waste of time because its only the minority of the kid that take it then we should get rid of football and soccer because that only pleases the kids that like football or soccer so lets get rid of those. Debate club does not have to be for the out performing schools because it does not have to be a big massive club with tournaments or something like that it could just be a few students in a classroom with a topic like my school does. But i think All schools should have a debate club because my school really wanted to have one but it took us three years to actually get it up and running.
All schools should have a Debate club/activity.

There are way too many schools in America. And there are a lot of students that really don't care about school work. According to BusinessWeek, the average student spends less than an hour on homework. Having all schools have a debate club would be meaningless. We would be only pleasing a minority. Also there was another statistic saying that 70% of teachers don't care or used to care about there student's academic life. A teacher there wouldn't even probably care about the topics. This is just pleasing a minority of kids. We should give a debate club to the schools that outperform others.
Video Games should not be aged, the parents should decide whether their child should play it.

The current PEGI does use those symbols of fists and syringes. They include this as well as a recommended age rating. http://www.pegi.info... On the back of any game rated by the ESRB is a breakdown of the content. "Violence" "Blood & Gore" "Drugs" "Mature content(sex)" So there is nothing to change here. The research a parent has to do is minimal. If a parent wants to fully abide by the age recommendation given by experts they have every right to do so.
Video Games should not be aged, the parents should decide whether their child should play it.

First of all let me apologise for not posting the link. It was a mistake that I only realised once you brought it to my attention. Please find the link below. I know that a parent can raise their child anyway they see fit, but there is nothing wrong with changing the rating system so that the parent can easily see what is in the game, and therefore they would be able to raise their child fairly. The parent may be against their 12 year old child playing a 15 year old game. However, the game may just be a 15 due to swearing; the parent may not have a problem with swearing, however they still won't let their child play it because they aren't prepared to investigate the game. I can guess by your rebuttal that your parents listened to you when you were young. Of course, every parent listens to their child, but sometimes only to a point. If the game has an age rating of 18, or adults only 18+ for ESRB, then the parents may just go off that and not give their child a chance to prove his or her point, simply because the age is above that of the child. I feel that the system should be changed because if the games did not display an age rating, and just had the fist symbol etc. on the front, then it would remove the problem of the parents going off the age. The parent would quite easily be able to see what was in the game just by looking on the front. Link: http://www.polygon.com...
Video Games should not be aged, the parents should decide whether their child should play it.

***I cannot see any link posted. Please be sure to post it in the your following argument, or the comments section ASAP. Pro has made one point this round, that some parents may not want to test or research video games for their children and thus restrict them from playing them. Until a parent has been proven unfit, they have the right to raise their child any way they see fit according to the law. If a parent decides they do not want their child to play a certain video game, for any reason, including experts who rate game content who have said a certain age bracket is not ready to play, then they have the right to do so. The current ESRB and PEGI system have taken the liberty of describing the content in a game with a letter rating (M=Mature E=Everyone) or a picture rating system (Syringe=drugs Fists=violence). This describes the content in the game to a point. I believe this accurately describes game content enough to anyone willing to look at the picture. If a parent is unwilling to research the game, what is to prevent the child from researching the game and bringing this to the parents? Why does the entire system need to be changed?
Video Games should not be aged, the parents should decide whether their child should play it.

I agree with you that many parents will investigate what is in the game instead of just going off the age rating, however some parents, particularly of the older age, will not do so, and they will just go off the age on the front. I know this because I know parents who do this. I have looked at the link connected to ESRB, (I am not used to ESRB because we use PEGI here in the UK) and I can see that they do use age ratings, and do not display what is in the game on the front. (Click the link below to see a picture showing this) I await my opponents rebuttal.
Video Games should not be aged, the parents should decide whether their child should play it.

I do not understand your premise. The title: "Video Games should not be aged, the parents should decide whether their child should play it." This is exactly what happens today. If a child is too young to buy the game, the parent must then research the game and buy the game for them. In this excerpt: "If instead of age ratings, the game just displayed what content was in the game, for example using the drugs sign or the bad language sign, then parents wouldn"t just go off the age rating, and would consider more what the game had in it, and determine whether their child is OK to play the game or not. " This is exactly what the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board) does today. They put an age suggestion (which is followed by sellers if the child is not of age) and the list what is in the game. The link below states all of the ratings the ESRB gives its games. They also detail what each rating can mean by content descriptors. I do not fully understand what premise you are making. You are definitely stating that you would like to see change in the rating system. I will be the Con point and state: No changes need to be made to the current video game rating system by the ESRB. http://www.esrb.org...
Video Games should not be aged, the parents should decide whether their child should play it.

As we know, video games have an age rating, whether it is a three or an eighteen. However, there may be things in the game which make it a fifteen for example, causing the parents to be against their child playing that certain game. However, the parents may be OK with the content of the game, and they just don’t know it. Of course, some parents may test the game before they make a decision on whether their child plays it or not, but some may not, and will say that their child may only play twelve and under. This is unfair to the child, as he or she desperately wants to play the game, but their parents won’t let him or her because they don’t understand what exactly makes the game a fifteen. If instead of age ratings, the game just displayed what content was in the game, for example using the drugs sign or the bad language sign, then parents wouldn’t just go off the age rating, and would consider more what the game had in it, and determine whether their child is OK to play the game or not. I look forward to reading my opponents reply, and continuing the debate further.
The Bible is Literally True

Since the average man knows things through experience, imagination, and thought, his understanding of higher truths also begins in the mind. That is why spirituality is represented by art, stories, ect. Understanding such realities through logical thought is impossible for the masses of men - hence, the need for legends. Although it may appear that such is not a "literal" interpretation, error is only a weak truth. Such "myths" present a clearer picture of higher realms than abstract thought.
The Bible is Literally True

My opponent claims the Bible's stories are not true, because there is evidence which contradicts them. However, drawing the conclusion that these ancient mythologies are false would be committing a larger, spiritual error. The Fall of Man is a teaching of all the major religions. Possessors of esoteric knowledge have throughout the ages transmitted these stories because they hold real symbolic powers, like words and abstract thoughts. Strictly speaking, it is impossible for the truth-seeking man to believe in Evolutionism.
There is no such thing as a soul

So populations of ignorant and emotional people prove that souls exists? -_- yea no.I see what your getting at with your emotional appeal with the whole mother thing, however what you are referring to is a loss of original consciousness, this is similar to how when you make a copy of something on a computer it uses different storage and etc to store the same information, however this doesn't mean its because of a soul, or that a soul exists in the first place.If you saying why do all religions have something like a soul, I give you this video that goes a bit more in depth about it.although I have very little hope you will even bother watching it for the purpose of this debate.
There is no such thing as a soul

If there's no evidence that it exists, why are there so many religions and daily activities that ties around soul? I believe that a soul isn't a state of matter, but more like an emphasis of emotion or an invisible power that tells you the rights and wrongs. It's like happiness or sadness, they aren't real things that you can sense. They only exist because we can feel them. Soul is like the same thing, but so powerful that we don't notice it; it's in our instincts. Imagine that you lost your mother in a car crash. you live with depression of her death and you cam't go over her death. Just then, scientists have found a way to clone someone by memory, and put it in a humanoid robot, that way, the robot would act, talk, smell, and feel like your mom. That way, you can sit down in your living room, with your cloned mom, and have cheerful talks together, that way you can continue to feel like that fatal car crash never happened. Would you be able to cope with her death with this replica? I feel like the most righteous answer to this one is no. It's because the robot is missing something from it that nothing can recreate. It's missing the soul of the mother. the soul is what makes eachother different from eachother. It's a thing that goes beyond personality and appearance. It's more like your true self. It's what makes me different from you, or something that makes identical twins completely different. This replica isn't your mom because it has no soul. Nothing can can resemble the soul that you were accustomed to even without noticing
There is no such thing as a soul

I guess a soul is something you can blame if you do something that could affect it, but a soul is a value of worth for the kind you have comitted in your life. Although soul is not a real thing that resides in your body, It is a thing that can be altered by your actions. Kind of like chi, or maybe even sins. Just because something has never been seen, or verified before, doesn't mean that it doesn't just simply exist. It exists because people believe that a soul is a value that is worth caring for. and also, without it, we can't say stuff like "I CAN SEE THROUGH YOUR SOUL, MAGGOT"