American Culture has deluded what freedom is

Note this is a shared BOP and Pro has the shared burden to show that American Culture has diluted what freedom is. I have the shared Burden to show it has not. I am going to set up a syllogism as I move down my contentions that will be refined and stated in the conclusion. C1) The process of diluting somethingDilute - to lessen the strength of (something) [1]Dilute - to diminish the strength, flavor, or brilliance of by admixture [1]When you choose to dilute something, you are making an attempt at lessening the strength of it or breaking it down in a sense. There is also something to note within this process. To dilute (x) you would have to add (y) to it, and (y) would have to be responsible for making the effect or strength diminish. The equation for dilution is generally thisC1 X V1 = C2 X V2C1 = Initial concentration or molarityV1 = Initial VolumeC2 = Final concentration or molarity V2 = Final volume[2][3][4]Take into consideration these examples Now let's move to the next set of examples To put this is simplistic terms, to dilute (x), (x) would need an objective base quantity. (X) would have to have a base value or amount. Then when you add (y), (y) would also have to have an objective quantity assigned to it and be able to be measured. (x) could equal 10 grams or 11 grams(y) could equal 1 gram or 2 gramsThe main point of this is basically stating that there has to be a value assigned to both (x) and (y) that is an objective measurement in order to dilute it. So for freedom do be diluted, there would have to be a way to measure it with a given unit of measurement. For something to be measured it must be tangible and be able to be measured with a unit of measurement- [5]So we can call this [P1] [P1] Something has to be tangible for it to be diluted. C2) Freedom is subjectiveWhile my adversary notes that freedom has a good many definitions and this adds to my point, there is something we have to accept and that is freedom is entirely subjective. What freedom is to one person, may not be freedom to another. What one person perceives as freedom, would not equate to another persons definition. So to simply say (x) is the definition of freedom is theoretically impossible. Freedom is an abstract thought/idea that varies between cultures and nations. So for jifpop to hold up his end of the BOP he must show that American Culture has diluted freedom within every mind of every person in the world. Since freedom is not tangible and is a concept, if freedom is not diluted in 1 specific persons mind, then his burden is not fulfilled. C3) Freedom is intangible. This plays into my C1 argument. For something to be diluted it first must be tangible. Freedom is an abstract thought/concept that varies among cultures [C2]. There is no objective way to get a quantitative value or measurement on what freedom is because it is not tangible, therefore it can not be diluted. Note the process of dilution from [C1]For freedom to be diluted there would have to be a way to assign a measurement to it, and then there would have to be something added to it (y). Both must be able to be measured, and both must have an objective quantitative value. There is no way to quantify a given amount of freedom [C2] because freedom is relative depending on culture and location and varies from person to person therefore it can not be diluted. Since we have established that freedom is an abstract idea that varies from person to person let's look at examples about why it is not measurable. Example A : 10 grams is objectively 10 grams. No matter who is holding the amount of grams, it is 10 grams regardless. When we are using 10 grams of (x) and adding (y) to it. These specific amounts are objectively measured. So if we are using 10 grams of oil or water, there is a specific way that it can be objectively measuredExample B :Person A defines freedom by (x) amountPerson B defines freedom by (y) amountThe issue this brings up is there is not an objective value that freedom can be assigned. This brings up to major issues with trying to dilute freedom.(a) There is no way to measure it with any given unit of measurement(b) Even if there was a given unit to measure it with, it would vary from person to person so it would not be an objective amount. A) For something be tangible it must be composed of atomsTangible - real or actual, rather than imaginary or visionary [6]This is essentially stating that to measure something it has to be real, you can not measure a concept. Everything that can be measured is composed of atoms and matter. Freedom is not composed of atoms due to it being an abstract thought/concept. Therefore since freedom is an abstract thought or concept, and is not tangible (composed of atoms), it can not be diluted because it can not be measured with a given unit of measurement. So we can call this [P2][P2] Freedom is an intangible conceptC4) America Fosters the Idea/Concept for FreedomFor a country to actually be free, they must actually be willing to accept the freedom. Take into consideration this article written by Lawrence E Harrisonis, about the prerequisites of freedom. He makes a point that freedom cannot be true or effective without the proper culture foundation. He then goes to state that America is ideally one of the best places if not the best place that has the best culture foundation as to where freedom can truly be present. He states this." Virtually all the most successful countries in the world today, including those in Western Europe, North America, and East Asia, and Australia and New Zealand, practice democratic capitalism. All these countries have benefited from religions or ethical codes that nurture democratic politics or economic development, or both: Christianity, particularly the Protestant sects; Judaism; and Confucianism. The three share, among other values, the belief that people can influence their destinies and a related emphasis on the future; a high priority for education; the belief that work is good; and celebration of achievement and merit." [7]He then goes on to make this point" Some cultures are prone to democratic politics, while others resist it. In his classic Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville made an observation in the 1830s that is relevant today: "Mexico, as happily situated [geographically] as the Anglo-American Union, adopted these same laws but cannot get used to democratic government. So there must be some other reason, apart from geography and laws, which makes it possible for democracy to rule the United States." For Tocqueville, that reason is culture: "…the habits of the heart… the different notions possessed by men, the various opinions current among them and the sum of ideas that shape mental habits." [7]What this is essentially claiming is that the US has the best cultural foundation to support freedom. The US in a giant melting pot of different cultures and ideas. In addition to this our culture teaches us the values of freedom from the moment we are born. It emphasizes and promotes different cultures and ideas blending together as one. We encourage women's rights, gay rights, social equality and are even putting in laws that require the government and corporations to treat everyone equally. We have freedom of religion, speech, and even the freedom to marry who we want. If you compare this to other countries where they are not so lucky and do not have the ability to chose what God to worship, or what wife they can marry, where gays are killed, and you could killed for being a Christian. We are really lucky. We have not diluted freedom, but are taught about the concept of freedom and how lucky we are from the day we are born. While someone can argue that no one "can truly be free", if freedom does exist the US exhibits the best possibility of the best possible freedom. We can lay this out in a syllogism as well[P1] For the best possible freedom to exist, there must be a good culture foundation[P2] The US possesses one of the best if not best, culture foundations in the world[C] Therefore the US has the best chance of having the best possible freedomMeaning that the US would not dilute freedom, but in fact be the manifestation of what freedom really is. ConclusionFirst Major Syllogism [P1] Something has to be tangible to dilute it[P2] Freedom is an intangible concept[C] Freedom can not be diluted. Second Major Syllogism [P1] For the best possible freedom to exist, there must be a good culture foundation[P2] The US possesses one of the best if not best, culture foundations in the world[C] Therefore the US has the best chance of having the best possible freedomThere are a few things Jifpop must do to win this debate(a) He must show that freedom can be diluted, meaning he must show that it is tangible and be measured with a specific unit of measurement. He must show that there is a possible way to assign a given value to abstract thought or idea that can be quantified and measured with any given unit of measurement. (b) He must show that freedom is diluted by American Culture in the minds of every single individual that exists. If there exists a freedom that has not been diluted by American Culture if the minds of (x) Individual, he has not upheld his BOP. (c) He must show that America has a bad culture foundationSoucres[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...(equation)[3] http://www.tocris.com...[4] http://www.quansysbio.com...[5] http://www.unc.edu...[6] http://dictionary.reference.com...[7] http://spectator.org...