BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
You Choose the Debate: 5 Topics

In both cases my opponent makes the mistake of forgetting that S1 and S2 have the same rationality. So, to his rebuttal 1: A mistake because of faulty reasoning would not happen to only one of them, but both of them if they use the same method of reasoning. For rebuttal 2: S1 and S2 have the same rationality when it comes to responding to emotional stimuli - therefore, peer pressure, guilt, etc would be worked through in the same fashion. If they both have the same information on the political parties, and the same rational responses toward emotional stimuli, then they would both come to the same conclusion. They have the same emotional intelligence. Example: S1 is born in the blue state of Illinois. S2 is born in the red state of Texas. They have equal knowledge about politics. (Required for definition of epistemic peer). The have equal rationality. (Therefore, they work their way through which political ideology is best in the same manner). They respond to emotional stimuli in the same fashion - so if there is a sob story about liberalism that S1 believes, S2 will believe it as well. They will both hear the same sob story, as well, because that is a requirement of having equal knowledge. Regards, Vi Veri
You Choose the Debate: 5 Topics

I agree with my opponent's definitions and claims 1.-6. I simply need to prove one situation about s1 and s2 disagreeing under these definitions and claims to win this debate round. 1. S1 and S2 are vulnerable to mistakes. In math class S1 and S2 have the same teacher, notes, and opinion on math. S1 and S2 are working on the same math problem. S1 and S2 have different answers of 41 and 42. They believe that their own answer is true while the other's is false. Therefore they disagree on the answer, "p". 2. S1 and S2 can have different evaluations. They both have the same knowledge about the U.S economy and they both agree that wealthier people should have their income taxed more than people who are not wealthy. However, S1 thinks wealthy people should be taxed by a set percentage highier than those not wealthy while S2 thinks the percentage would be too high of what S1 is suggesting. S2 believes the claim of S1 is false. Therefore, they disagree. 3. Peer pressure is a factor in everyone's life. S1 and S2 have been friends since grade school. They are epistemic peers. Both of them are elected into the U.S. House of representatives. They both are liberal people. S1 believes the war in Afghanistan is a good cause, supports sending more troops and that President Obama shouldn't have set forth a year for withrawing troops. He agrees because he represents a conservative region. This contradhcts S2's claims, who represents a liberal region. Therefore, S1 and S2 have a disagreement.
You Choose the Debate: 5 Topics

Hello hello, all. I've decided to kick start a choose your own topic debate in which I will argue as Pro or Con. My opponent will choose one of these debates and choose their side. Actual debating will begin in Round 2, starting with me. Definitions will also be supplied in Round 2. If there are any questions, please leave them in the comments section for me to answer. TOPICS: 1. Disagreements between Epistemic Peers are impossible. 2. Logical Fatalism can not be disproved. 3. Terrorism can be justified. 4. Beauty is objective. 5. It is true that if an infinite being can be imagined, it must exist.
Extracurricular activities being bad for you

Seeing as though Pro has forfeited their round I am forced to continue without rebuttals. EVIDENCE & (non-existent) REBUTTAL Studies [1] show that extracurricular activities are beneficial to both student"s health and education. Pro states that extracurricular activities "are not the right aura for a classroom type of setting" which is confusing, as extracurricular activities occur "outside" of school (as per the definition).* Students are given that ability to: a. Make friends outside of school; b. Further develop intrapersonal and team skills in sports teams; c. Learn time management and prioritising tasks to cater for homework and exams; and, d. Students also are given the chance to explore and diversify their interests [2]. Pro states that extracurricular activities "do not provide a solid foundation for later learning". This statement is both na"ve and incorrect. As extracurricular activities give students the ability to explore their interests it also gives them the chance to turn this interest into a career. In some cases, even having non-academic extracurricular activities on your resume can be noticeable to employers [3]. e.g. Soccer players become professional soccer players. Amateur photographers become professional photographers. Junior NFL players are given the chance to compete in college, then perhaps the professional league etc etc. Although, often times, these "interests" are not turned into lifelong careers" However, it is absolutely necessary that kids have a life and are not studying 24/7 as this has negative effects on their health [4]. Sources [1] Wilson, Nikki L. 2009, Impact of Extracurricular Activities on Students, available at: http://www2.uwstout.edu..., accessed on 17.04.16 [2] Burgess, Joy. n.d, Extracurricular School Activities and the Benefits, available at: http://education.more4kids.info..., accessed on 17.04.16 [3] Enterprise Rent-A-Car. 2016, 10 NON-ACADEMIC ACTIVITIES THAT WILL HELP YOU GET A JOB, available at: https://www.enterprisealive.com..., accessed on 17.04.16 [4] Canapari, Craig MD. 2012, Too Much Homework, Too Little Sleep: Structural Sleep Deprivation in Teens, available at: http://drcraigcanapari.com..., accessed on: 17.04.16 Looking forward to your argument! *Perhaps Pro is unaware that extracurricular activities happen outside of school hours and times? Demonstrating incompetance in the debating the matter...
Extracurricular activities being bad for you

I accept. BOP Pro claims that Extracurricular activities are bad for you. BOP is fully on Pro to prove their claim. As Con, I will endeavour to post rebuttals and provide points demonstrating the opposite. Definitions a. Extracurricular (adj): (of an activity at a school or college) pursued in addition to the normal course of study. b. Activity (noun): 1. the condition in which things are happening or being done. 2. a thing that a person or group does or has done. c. Bad (adj): not such as to be hoped for or desired; unpleasant or unwelcome or of poor quality or a low standard. Sources a. Google, 2016, . https://www.google.com.au... b. Google, 2016, . https://www.google.com.au... c. Google, 2016, . https://www.google.com.au...
Vast economic disparity is harmful to the US economy

I will reiterate my last round summary: (1) Inequality may or may not be increasing(1a) Measurments of inequality are flawed(1b) Measurments exagerate income inequaliy(2) Economic disparity can be good under certian situations(2a) The 'good' economic disparity is what exists in the modern economyThus, inequality is really not an issue now, and in the future it probably will never be. I have proven vast economic disparity may not actually be an issue--how the economic disparity is created could be an issue. I provided two studies suggesting the way the inequality has come to be is the 'good' form of inequality which actually improves the lives of everyone--even those who are not super rich. Good luck on your exams! :D
Vast economic disparity is harmful to the US economy

"The incredible fact" is calculated by the sources mentioned underneath. Source: U.S. Census Bureau; Minnesota Population Center/IPUMS Explanation and analysis: http://www.nytimes.com... For the sake of fairness (and partly due to my exam tomorrow of which I must bone up), let us use the last round on waiving off. It has been a delightful, if not gratifying, debate. Disagreements aside: You are one hell of a debater. You definitely deserve credit for your deep thoroughness and clear dedication to the wonderful science of economics. I wish I could shake hands with you, 16kadams. Thank you, once again.
MS Paint Battle: tvellalott versus lickdafoot

I challenge you, lickdafoot, to a ms paint battle!This is how it works: We will do three drawings each. You will choose something, anything really, for me to draw, for example; A ninja riding a train. Be creative but realistic, I am not a skilled computer artist so keep it reasonable.You give me something to draw and I'll draw it in round two. Round one is only for your acceptance and my first thing.Do you accept this challenge?
The sun came on the first day of creation.

I win. My opponent yielded facts for opinions, "I believe science does not prove a model of creation," _ I win as this is the entire debate. " since its scientifically impossible," _ he can't assert that because he is unaware, it is untrue. " and that even if it says in small print in the bible that the sun coming first, which is scientifically impossible," _ he says this again. Which it doesn't. ~NO one ever thought the sun came first.** That was just him rejecting the content and Context of the scriptures. He wasn't referencing scripture, he was referencing his own insolence* { Insolence: disobedience for self promotion [ ie. saying his understanding and opinion is superior to those presenting authority] (distinct from impudence - asserting what one has no ability to have knowledge to assert. and arrogance - a suggestion to be opposed for delusional incentive) " it still says it in the bible, even when there is a contradiction." - It didn't say it. So it isn't a contradiction. The End. Thank you. thanks for allowing me this opportunity to correct you. It was pleasure to be given the opportunity to reprove you.
The sun came on the first day of creation.

I believe science does not prove a model of creation, since its scientifically impossible, and that even if it says in small print in the bible that the sun coming first, which is scientifically impossible, it still says it in the bible, even when there is a contradiction. And I pointed out where. Now stars create planets that orbit around the sun, true. So other stars have other planets, but it is indeed much rarer then a normal lone star. So this philosopher made a good guess, but he was not on the 100 percent correct. But if he says so, then he must have pin pointed the possibility of aliens, but God made Earth and humans in his own image. And chose to bear Earth with life. What makes us so special. If one thing in the bible is false, then how do you know once thing is true. I even recently also watched a bible cartoon that seemed like it came from the 80's that I watched in elementary school, and It said god created the sun and the earth, then the stars. Not saying that's accurate, but its to me another evidence to saying the sun came first in the bible.
The sun came on the first day of creation.

You are unusually stupid (not an insult: determined using provided facts; Simply a statement ~ Not even a judgement) You repeated the claim that you were 'taught' that the sun was create on the first day. SUN does not = Light Light does not = Sun Light came on the first day of creation, according to the account, The sun came on the 4th day of creation, according to that model. You do not need modern astronomy to know that the sun distributes light into space. Nor did astronomers from long ago determine that stars were even remotely small ~ they had depth perception and had determined that if those stars were far away (because they knew that they were) then they would appear smaller. Like a messenger on a horse on a hill appearing small. - Common sense; and it is written as such throughout ancient astronomy for the past 4000 years in 4 cultures (Europe, middle east, India, Asia {and very notably America aswell}). "yet I believed the sun light came first, since the universe and outer space is kinda a dark place without the sun. But without modern astronomy, no one would know that." ~ that wasn't a scripturally nor scientifically inspired thought. That was Refusing to acknowledge that thousands of years of recorded world history, studying, philosophy, math, and science exceeded your own ability to comprehend the situation. It was also wrong, not (thus) not only for the scientific facts you ignored, as well as not referencing scriptures at all, BUt because you didn't even compare the Model of Creation to Science. Science proves the Model of Creation. ~ one can say perhaps it's time you started believing in aliens, so that you might believe an advance race told us how creation happened. AS to inspire you to properly assess the model of certain given in the bible & then prepare for an alien occupant to slaughter all of the Blasphemers who denied the word of God and promoted secular lifestyles, and neglected to worship the omnipresent Spirit God who loves the afflicted over the oppressor (ie. abused wife and child over the aggressor). "And we learned that God created the sun on the first day." ~ I am going to call you a liar, and use that against you in the debate. The sun was created on the fourth day in every Bible and Torah. You are not allowed to cherry-pick when interpreting or considering scripture, science, MATH (scripture is the ethical science ("math") of human behaviour) or Anything! so, NO, the Bible actually says many times in it that it is unforgiveable to Blasphemy against the Holy spirit and Cherry-pick (Priests allude to the full context** they don't cherry-pick). So, I have in this Round, concluded that you were wrong: IN your conclusion; method of reaching such a conclusion; your approach of administering such an assertion; as well as having lied; attempted to disillusion the content of debate; gossiped / spammed false historical records; Misquoted the sources of your information (not misunderstood*, Misquoted); and had no support for your claim. Thank you. I anticipate my next round. If you wish to see how Creation can be proven accurate, search my Profile's Debate records.
The sun came on the first day of creation.

http://www.pbs.org... This is a link I found to backup my star statement, and I hope you find Nova a reliable enough source. But as I also talked in educating myself about the bible through asking religious people, they have concluded that stars came on a day, but not on the first. So when I looked it up and found twilight on day four,(sorry for the wrong day), for day and the night, I figured it was like elementary school again, were I was shocked the sun was a star, yet I believed the sun light came first, since the universe and outer space is kinda a dark place without the sun. But without modern astronomy, no one would know that. And this was confirmed since I was religious and went to catholic school as a kid. And we learned that God created the sun on the first day. And when I started learning interesting Astronomy, It was after I was religious and would have said, well God works in mysterious ways. But not really. In the Genesis's though, one said God created the sun on the first, and in another one God created the sun on the fourth. So since I don't believe in the bible, and it contradicts itself, why not use what benefits me, because there's two sides to this in the bible, and I'm sure this might end in a tie. Genesis 1:3-5, and 1:14-19, you cant prove whats wrong in the bible.
The sun came on the first day of creation.

My opponent here was spamming the idea that, "The sun came on the first day of creation." He can't remotely begin to support that clause with any amount of vigor, substance or support (criteria. My opponent is defending his Clause ( regarding the Sun ), used to establish his theory of evolution that he is demonstrating against Chipmonk in another debate. "You see on the fifth day of the bible God created the twilight (Stars) yet the sun on the first, let there be light came first. So the people who wrote this did not understand that the sun is indeed a star that gives off continues atoms that it produces for the creation of life. " ~ he is serving shitt on a table and calling it steak, while telling us to eat it with a smile. TheEn, rants a full blown crap spiel - which wouldn't have been bad, for what it was, if he presented it as not being True, or factual, or scientific, but simply a fiction model. I repeat*** My opponent is defending that Clause ( regarding the Sun ), used to establish his theory of evolution that he is demonstrating against Chipmonk in another debate. I am pro, that he is wrong. He is pro for his assertion.
Androids are better than iPhones.

Since my opponent has forfeited the final round, I will make a brief closing argument based on my previous arguments. I will not add any additional arguments. iPhone, by far, provides the best possible user experience in a mobile phone. It provides the consistency of a company who develops both hardware and software and provides a quality product. Many of my opponents arguments are unfounded and you will see I have more than adequately refuted them in Round 3. Android is not better than iPhone and has many downfalls to it including inconsistent quality among devices, a poor user experience, and a cluttered market. When the entire Android market is compared to the iPhone, the iPhone is far more superior and consistent. I appreciate your votes and your consideration of my opponent's forfeit in the final round.
Androids are better than iPhones.

In this round, I will rebuttal the arguments from Round 2. 1. My opponent argues that iPhones have a higher price than Android phones. While this may be true in some cases, it ultimately depends on the quality of phone. Android's phone market extends from the cheap, nearly unusable phone, to top-of-the-line technology phones. Looking at the newest standard model Samsung phone compared to the newest standard model iPhone, the retail price of the Samsung phone is $118 USD more expensive. If we are going to compare prices, we must compare quality as well. iPhone is no more expensive than comparable Android phones. 2. My opponent argues that the iPhone does not have expandable memory. Granted, this is a loss for the iPhone, but, like Android, there are ways to overcome this issue. There are a number of apps for iPhone which provide cloud storage for photos, documents, music, etc. Apple also has its iCloud which is wonderful for keeping music, photos, and iPhone settings synced at all times. There are a number of great and innovative ways to keep stuff stored, protected, and accessible from other devices. 3. My opponent argues that Apple provides little to no choice regarding phones. This argument has some issues. First, iPhone is a device whereas Android is an operating system. When you buy an iPhone, you get an iPhone. When you buy an Android, you can buy a slew of devices and you may not know the quality of what you are getting. I argued in Round 2 regarding the benefit of having the same company producing both hardware and software. I also argued why Android's market is simply too cluttered and makes decision making difficult. Second, Apple does provide choice between storage capacities, colors, and models. My opponent makes it sound like you can only buy the newest model, but this is simply false. Many older models are still available for purchase if desired. 4. My opponent argues that iPhone apps are more expensive. Generally, the most used apps on iOS are free. Also, many of the free Android apps that have a paid counterpart on iOS are ad supported on Android. Overall, app prices are very comparable on iPhone and Android. 5. My opponent argues that you need iTunes and iPhoto to access your music and photos. This is simply false. I rarely use iTunes and use Spotify instead (this is just my preference). I can load music on my phone and play it. iPhones are not limited to just iTunes for music. Also, Dropbox is a great alternative for iPhoto if you need to get photos to your computer. 6. My opponent argues that Android batteries are replaceable. This is an advantage for Android, but not an issue that I or others I know have experienced. 7. I am not familiar with the Android visible file system, but there are ways to easily transfer files on iPhones such as Dropbox and other cloud storage apps. 8. The notification system on Android is aesthetically cluttered. iPhone notifications are easily accessible from anywhere on the phone.
Androids are better than iPhones.

In this round both of us are going to show rebuttal of the opponent's arguments of ROUND 2. The truth is that iOS is a more limited, simplified experience However, the alerts system is the one area where Android is just flat out more useful and more usable than iPhone. If that sounds trivial, it's not -- especially for business professionals and others who do a lot of stuff with their smartphones. Alerts give you timely updates of important information, quickly let you know about things that need your attention, and give you an at-a-glance look at your latest messages from various sources. In reality Androids provide better user friendly environment. Android is more flexible and customizable. Android phones are basically customized for most of the users to make their experience with android the best. Unlike Apple, it also provides customization so that if one doesn't like a specific thing one can easily change it. The best thing about android is that we can choose the type of mobile whose features we like and can afford. But in iPhone we need to use the same company's product and of the same price. Each variety of mobile is available under Android. So consistency should not be a factor for choosing iPhones over android as there is an internal consistency in Androids. Choosing android phone is not at all a tough job. We just need to know that what features we want and each type of mobile is available.
Androids are better than iPhones.

In this round, I will present my argument for why I believe iPhones are better than Android phones. I will save my rebuttal of my opponent's arguments for Round 3. iPhones provide an overall better user experience than Android phones. They are user friendly and easy to navigate. Apple has designed its user interface to be self-explanatory. Android may offer more customization in some aspects, but this can lead to user frustration when they get lost in the infinite menus of Android. Apple has provided the opportunity for customization with ease, but it has also developed an operating system that is already excellent in itself and does not need third party customization. iPhones also provide consistency. There are a number of excellent Android phones, but there are also a lot of awful Android phones that do not provide the functionality necessary for users. There are many Android phones that do not have the capacity to run the operating system to its fullest potential which can cause lagging in use and a frustrated user experience. With an iPhone, the user is guaranteed an excellent phone with a well-working operating system. When you pick up an iPhone, you know what you are getting. With an Android, you must do significant research to ensure that the phone you are getting is going to provide you the experience you want. The fact that Apple makes its phone and its operating system is why so many have turned to iPhones as their phone of choice. Apple knows how the hardware and software interact with one another and how they can provide the best user experience with those two aspects of the device. Android phones have one company producing the software and another producing the hardware. This, as I mentioned above, is a reason why some phones simply cannot handle the Android operating system. I would also say that I find (and I believe other people find) the Android market to be extremely cluttered. With such a variety of phones, it can be overwhelming to pick the phone that will work for you. iPhones, on the other hand, make it easy and simple for choosing your device and you know you will receive quality no matter what.