Verbal communication is more harmful than beneficial to the world...

Pride cometh before the fall. I'm glad that you enjoyed the previous round- I used some of my favorite movie quotations- did you catch them all? I wasn't angry at you, bucko, I'm just taking pleasure in seeing your mind at work. It's a very intriguing thing that you're saying you've done here. Essentially, you invented a game that only you knew the rules to and then say that you win because I didn't figure out the game. "What I did was called a debate strategy." Not in the least. It manages to both subvert the point of debate AND make you look like a dick. Not to me, just in general. I like it. "My opening argument was that talking creates too much counterproductive information. Now technically, that is in no way paradoxical. It goes to show that humans not only excessively harm the earth but also themselves--it's additional information." Additional information: Information that is in addition to information already given. So no, that's not additional information, it's (see above) stupid. "But, I'll give you a break" Like a kit-kat bar. "had you been sharp enough to turn my own words against me right off the bat, simply asking the question of: "The word 'world' has multiple meanings. Why are you only addressing humans?" then there would be no way I could win...because I would have imploded, failing to answer my OWN question of debate. You would have beaten me at my own game." Uh huh. Had I ignored your words and attacked your definitions. See, at that point I thought that you were being sincere in your argument and that you meant what you insinuated by your argument- that "world" meant "people." Doing otherwise and attacking your definitions would have made me a dick. "However, you didn't do so. You fell for my trap...the bait of which was to purposely stray a little off topic. You bit and went off topic yourself. You should have been quicker on the draw." Umm... I'm having trouble deciding whether that's dickish or just stupid. Especially considering that you didn't, in fact, stray off topic at all if we assume that you were being sincere in any of your initial arguments. But I suppose we can't do that. "You argue that "barbecue sauce isn't necessarily harmful to pigs. Killing them is." Amen to that. You're absolutely right. However, that is a totally different situation." Very good. How? "Comparing apples to oranges reveals your weakness: generalizing." Wait a second- you never said how I was comparing apples and oranges, which, by the way, are both fruits. And delicious. Nothing wrong with those comparisons. "The fact that verbal communication (which, by definition, is using words to exchange ideas with one another)" Agreed on the definition! "led to the knowledge of good and evil (such as in the book of Genesis) serves as a very large catalyst of the harm humans have done to one another and the environment." I refute thy argument! Catalysts can't be blamed for what they catalyze. "harming people is simply more fun." ... well THAT explains you. "Once Eve, who was VERBALLY tempted by the devil," who was a SNAKE! Damn snakes! They must be inherrently evil. "Mankind became worse and worse until nowadays, the message being sent to the youth is essentially: "Screw everybody else." Not true- our youth are the most altruistic and service-oriented of any recent generation. Yours is an opinion- find numbers that refute me and then maybe we can talk. "Global warming (which can basically be blamed on one thing: cars)" ... errm.... no. Cows. Once more, science agrees with me. Woohoo! "And all these problems blossomed from one event: the devil verbally tempting Eve. Or, if you don't believe in the story of creation, then the first "sin" by the first man." I point to an earlier problem as the true source of unhappiness- God creating Eve in the first place. Women must be more harmful than beneficial to the world, too! "we have both created very detailed and very long arguments, but the whole basis of the argument is extremely simple: whether or not verbal communication is more harmful to the world than beneficial." True! "Logically speaking, verbal communication can't be, as a whole, more beneficial." Fine, then logically it can't be, as a whole, more harmful either. And I don't have to prove that it's more beneficial, all I have to do is prove that it's a non-issue and they're both equal. "But that's not a good thing, for the more efficient we become, the closer our doom creeps." Opinion. You're stretching. "And you have failed to prove the opposite, because there is no opposite. It's fact." See above. Opinion. The philisophical school that says man is constantly descending is countered by the philisophical school that says we are, instead, ascending towards a golden age. You prove nothing. Your argument fails. "Checkmate." Ditto.