Beliefs are inherited and rarely questioned.

Beliefs are inherited and rarely questioned. Thankfully, my opponent's response is both what I'd expected and hoped for. My opponent has caused the stone to roll by bringing up some fantastic points for my argument. I intend to construct this response with non-contentious reasoning. If the reader does not agree with a statement, the following statement will put it into context. I will once again clearly separate the two points of my argument. POINT ONE - Beliefs are inherited My opponent has deconstructed my argument well. However, his interpretation of my argument is incorrect. He has noted that I claimed independent thought cannot exist. This is completely untrue. In starting, let me define independent thought. (www. wordsmyth. net) Independent (3rd def. ) not needing the support of advice of another; self-sufficient. Thought (2nd def. ) the product of mental processes, esp. a single notion. In brief, independent thought is answering your own questions, or solving your own problems. Children learn from their parents. They see them walk, they walk. They listen to them talk, they talk. They ask them questions, they get answers. These answers can be godly or ungodly, conservative or liberal. You trust your parents and you learn from them. That is nature. Children do not dedicate themselves to walking to the end of the world to see what is at the end - they ask their parents. Thus, at this point independent thought is limited and this is where beliefs are inherited. Here is where my opponent has misunderstood me. As a person develops and questions their surroundings, they exercise independent thought. However, in their surroundings they will often observe things that support and thus strengthen their beliefs. **That Galileo idiot can't be right! If the world was round all the seas would wash down to the bottom and fall off! Or, "That bird is so beautiful that it must be a result of god's work" or, "that bird has evolved with prettier colours to attract a better mate" BOTH of these answers can be considered rational depending on the existing belief. BOTH answers are the result of independent thought processes but BOTH reinforce the original beliefs. The person who was raised as religious is not going to assert, "that bird's colours are obviously the result of evolution, my parent's were wrong! ". Likewise is the case with the non religious observer. Thus, observations made with one's independent thought are likely to to support the existing belief. Of course this independent questioning could lead to a change in beliefs but NONETHELESS, beliefs were inherited beforehand. My opponent stated: "Independent thought certainly exists, thus beliefs are not directly inherited, rather influenced. As these concepts are extremely different in that society would not have advanced at all from the stone ages without independent thought. " My opponent is suggesting that inheriting political, religious and social beliefs from our forefathers does not involve independent thought. He is also suggesting that the exercising of independent thought will result in a change of opinion. I think I have demonstrated otherwise above. ******************************** My opponent has based his entire response around the claim that my argument denies the existence of independent thought, which is false. For this reason I would ask the reader to disregard any points my opponent had successfully made under the false assumption that I have now dismissed. ******************************** ______________________ Independent thought does exist, but is does not change the standing of my argument. Vote PRO ______________________ My opponents ending point was: ". .. independent thought certainly exists, thus beliefs are not directly inherited, rather influenced. " The major flaw in this statement is my opponent does not understand the meaning of inheritance. He has assumed that because a belief has changed or been influenced into becoming something else, it is no longer an inheritance. This is an incorrect understanding of the term. Here is an example: I inherit a house from my grandparents. I paint the house pink. I sell the house to a South African couple who tear it down to make way for a golf course. Did I inherit the house? Yes. Regardless of later influences and changes to a persons beliefs, the inheritance was the first thing to happen. It was direct. Right at the start. ___________________________ My reasoning above has shown us that **beliefs are inherited**. Vote PRO ___________________________ POINT 2 My opponent began his response to this point by stating: "This point depends largely on the previous point. " I would ask the reader to take into account that I have denied his previous point. Thus, any problem I present below is in addition to the "independent thought" misinterpretation. My opponent presented this historical reference: "Up until the late 16th century, the entire world believed in a theory known as geocentrism, or that the Sun revolved around the Earth (. http://en.wikipedia.org......). As this was the belief for thousands of years, it was basically endorsed by all inhabitants of the world. However, in the late 16th century, heliocentrism, or that the Earth revolves around the Sun, was brought into light from Galileo (. http://en.wikipedia.org......). He questioned the norm given by his predecessors and emphasized heliocentrism despite opposition from the government. In fact, the opposition was so strong he was thrown in jail. The fact remains; he certainly supports the existence of independent though. " This is in-fact a perfect example to support both points of my argument. In Galileo's time, everybody for generations had been raised with the belief that the world was flat. I think we can quite safely assume that this belief would've first been presented to a child by their parents, followed by the same independent questioning and strengthening of the belief that I presented earlier. Galileo was unquestionably a rarity. He actively sought to disprove something he and everyone else had always believed. The fact that Galileo was jailed is testament to the fact that beliefs are rarely questioned. Galileo was an opposition to these peoples' beliefs and they were not willing to question them. -Galileo was the rare person to question a belief. -The community who jailed him were to people who would not question their beliefs. Thus, __________________ Beliefs are **rarely questioned**. __________________ My opponent deconstructed my second point equally as accurately as the first. However following this deconstruction, my opponent states: "Whether or not the example is true in anyone's case I cannot say, but this is the basic questioning process. We question, but structured beliefs often leave out the cons and are extremely focused on the pros. Or visa versa. " Firstly, this is very similar to the argument I presented in my first point when confirming the presence of independent thought. However, reference is made to a questioning process, and this is important. I wish to propose that it is not the beliefs that are being questioned, merely the surroundings. This questioning leads to the reinforcement of the belief far more often than the weakening. In conclusion to this point I will address my opponents rebuttal regarding swing voting. I made an error in presenting this example, which was to assume the presence of a compulsory voting law that isn't present in the USA. My explanation of the large significance swinging votes would be the fact that campaigning has the ability to effect voter registration. However there is another factor which I will present in more depth in my final argument, and that is people who are raised with uncommitted or contradicting beli