azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

ok example animals don't always kill because they may not have the energy the same with us if you did not read my point. other example there are two animals they see some died food. they may kill over it they may not. they may intimidate each other until one gives up because he is out matched. they both live but one does not get the food. they do this because they don't want to risk hurt or geting killed. other example they may not need to kill because they can steal other died food from another animal. it could cause a fight but not most of the time because they question should I kill him and keep my food should I give up and find more. other example they question should I kill this animal walking by or should I keep eating the food I got of this tree so I don't get hurt or killed over more food I don't need. so fact animals don't just kill they question most of the time just like us.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Animals may not kill because they don't have energy is not valid. If they don't the energy they won't do anything, this is not mercy, this is lack of ability.When you say two animals may see already dead food food, are you referring to prey that's already dead, and the two animals don't kill each other over it. Again this is not mercy. Lions naturally fight over a kill, their nature (outside of killing) is dominant. Tigers, on the other hand, do not, they will share it, that is their nature. So that example is dashed.Before I continue, did you catch that absurd blip in my last argument?
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

my example is not dashed because your answer is wrong it not because there lack of ability.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Before you get another a fact out of me, did you see the absurd blip in my longest argument?
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

it is not fact that it is there lack of ability. I didn't go to school and study animals for nothing.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Okay so you didn't read the silly blip in my last actual argument, which means you're not reading my arguments. Since you're not we're done here.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

I read all your arguments and answer all your questions. do you just give up that easy
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Clearly you haven't. I asked you one simple question that I will now repeat "Did you find the silly blip in my last actual argument" and you refused to give me an answer. You just continued to spout your point, with no evidence, or with evidence that I put down.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

I never seen no silly blip. there is your answer happy !!!!!!!!
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Last time I will repeat this, then no more. If killing was human nature, every human would kill when their survival was threatened, no one would look for any other way. We do, look for other ways that is, proving that we are not as savage as the side you are arguing for claims. your answer to that I never said we would never look anyother way I said we would question if there was another way just like any other animal. But if there was no other way we would kill because we were born that way just like anyother animal.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Copy paste ≠ read. The longest argument I wrote, has in it a small blip, that if you had read it, you would see was out of the ordinary, and after writing it, I even asked if you caught it. You neglected it, and my questions of it, three times, you are not reading my arguments, perhaps at best you are skimming.You are at this point, embarrassing yourself, you could just as easily go back, read the argument, find anomaly, and tell it to me. you moron. I'll try again here's the anomaly cats grow on trees in Pennsylvania humor me and repeat this, or don't expect another reply.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

animals 80% of the time question. I went to school study animals. I work out with wild. they fired me after they found out that I had sex with my dog. I know that they do question should I kill or not animals don't just kill anything they see. And they do not just go after smell prey. But it is still in them to kill if they need to just like us.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

are you talking about thisThere I have completely defeated your point on animals questioning kills unless you can provide actual evidence, if you can not, do not bring it up again, because it's defeated.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

for example animals don't kill they question do I need to kill this or should I save my energy on something easy to kill. we do the same why would I need to run after food when I can just wait and let it walk in to my trap. then kill it.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Could you please provide an example of an animal questioning whether or not to kill? A video, a peer reviewed article, anything. As sarcastic as this proposal is, it's just as sincere. I will be quite stumped to know that animals question killing, but as for now i do not believe you.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

ok give me a minute !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Take your time, I'm more than certain that you won't find anything.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

yeah, but so far you have failed to provide evidence for your claims.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

he has not either and I am just saying what I no not just me but what we all was born with in nature. And you need to stay out of are arguments.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

This is a public argument. If you fear multiple forms of opposition you shouldn't argue publicly.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Actually, he has provided evince.You have failed to so and ignore his points.Also, how old are you? And is English your native language?
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

please so me were kid or I will bann you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Okay, can you re-state that post with proper grammar and spell checking? I can't understand anything you're saying.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Huh ?
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

That capacity is an express part of our nature, whether it is actuated or not. If it were not in our nature then we would be incapable of doing it. This is also true for cannibalism and acting against our principles.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

At this point it boils down to disagreeing over what makes something our nature.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Correct, and my argument is that if something is a naturally occurring capacity within the human species then it is an aspect of our nature. You have presented absolutely no compelling for why we should consider such a natural capacity to be unnatural to the human condition.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Simply put I don't believe just because we can do something that it is our nature. I believe that if it is our nature it would come 'natural' to us. Killing doesn't come natural to most people.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

You are ignoring circumstantial context entirely. It is wholly within the nature of most human beings to be capable of killing under certain circumstances (e.g. self defense, even revenge). That this part of our nature is not brought forth for most people in their lifetime is hardly an argument for it not being a part of our nature. Most people will not save the life of a drowning child because they will not find themselves in that context, but that does not mean it is not in the nature of most people to do so.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

If it is only under circumstances that even 'most' humans will kill, why would it not make more sense to believe that it is human nature to push on and survive, rather than to kill? I offered to one other debater that in pressing situations humans will 'usually' look for ways to survive outside of killing, and will only resort to that as a last result and with guilt that remains forever.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

That it may also be a prevailing attribute in human behavior to use killing as latter or final resort, that does not make the capacity for killing any less a part of human nature. That humans may feel guilt after killing also does not negate the naturalness of killing.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Again we're pushing and pulling, pitting opinion vs opinion, neither side proving anything more that what they believe to be true based on what's present. I think this debate is also done.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

I disagree with your premise as to why this debate is done, but nevertheless agree that it is done.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

I agree. In fact, for every piece of writing that talks about how difficult it is to kill, and how difficult the aftermath can be, there is another pieces that talks about just how easy it is. Sometimes, the same piece will describe both how easy and difficult it is.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Not really. Sociologists have tried and tested that children are born with a sense of equality and unity. Adults are the ones responsible for teaching them how to be cruel.Throughout history, genocides and persecutions are done out of need to destroy competitors, vengance or simply because they see themselves as superior creatures than their victims.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

no it not adults. I don't think so. yes adults tell kids stuff but not all of it is wrong. how did the first humans on the earth know what to do. it was born in to them to kill. if they did not know to kill then how did they survive.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Instinct.As social animals, it is embedded in our DNA to promote unity and equality. But due to ignorance, selfishness and greed, it is inevitable to have such a dark history.All children are born with a kind heart but we learned how to be cruel as we get older
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

that is not true. you are not just born with a kind heart.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Really? Please do furnish us with these purported sociological tests and results. Even were your claim true, that children may so easily be impressed upon with violent tendencies or capacity is indicative that killing and violence come naturally to human beings.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Please bear in mind that the act of killing and murder is different from predation.As for your statement, yes, it is true. The sense of morality is something of nature. But the sense of cruelty is gained through nurture. There are plenty of tests done to prove it. 1. Starting with the "Emotional Feedback" where we are able to feel the emotion that we gave. It is proof that we humans are equipped with the tools to unite each other and form a society.2. "Self Awareness". Being able to observe our individuality is one thing. But the ability to insert ourselves into the situation of others gave birth to the ability to feel guilt, pity, and sympathy3. Act of Self Sacrifice. The emotion of Love came in many different forms but all of them has one similarity-placing others above yourself. In a biological sense, this does not make any sense but then you remembered, we are all a single species with similar goals-survival of our race. We were not born to enjoy life, but to die for othersDo not get me wrong, there is a reason why we need to learn how to be cruel. But my point stands. Every human on Earth are born with a good heart
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

then tell me this is every animal on Earth are born with a good heart. because if every human is born with a good heart then every animal born would have a good heart too
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Pretty much yes. Notice how young animals can be so trusting and harmless?Being a social animal equates to being an animal that follows certain conducts of morality in order to survive. We all started at square 1. We are all good, until life thought us the meaning of survival
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

I am well aware of the distinctions; this debate pertains to killing and not predation.I again ask for your actual evidence that positive morality is a product of nature and cruelty a product of nurture. Simply observing that humans have some positive attributes neither proves that those attributes are a product purely or primarily of nature nor that negative attributes are not.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Okhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_morality http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Are-Babies-Born-Good-183837741.html
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

The first source represents summarized extractions from Charles Darwin's The Descent of Man. Our understanding of evolution has advanced considerably since 1871 when the theory was first posited. The second source actually observes that present research more strongly indicates for a complex confluence of positive and negative attributes in babies, rather than a simplistic and absolute positive morality. Excerpts that you may have missed:"[Warneken] feels that the picture is more complicated, with broadly pro-social impulses competing with, rather than develomentally predating, selfish ones.""3-month-olds like people of their own race more than others, experiments have shown, and 1-year-olds prever native speakers of those of another tongue. Yes, a baby prefers the good guy - unless the bad one, like the baby, eats graham crackers. If the good guy is a green-bean eater, forget it. Babies, in addition, are big fans of punishment."
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

New discoveries about evolution has not changed anything about the main idea. Other than that, I cannot see anything much to argue about.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

The main idea is that we evolve. Our understanding of how that process works has become significantly more nuanced. This includes developments in research like the ones I referenced proving my point, from the article you cited. The evidence is not on your side on this matter.I am done here. There really is no point in attempting to debate with someone who denies that scientific developments over the past 150 years are relevant and then offers evidence for the other side.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

No really. Decades had pass since the first publication of "On the Origin of Species" and yet, its ideas has remained the same. New ideas were added but practically nothing was removed and disproved. So in the end, it's still in the same root.And neighter did the paragraphs that you cheery pick has changed anything on our table. Your farewell sounds edgy. But whatever.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

The only thing that is apart of human nature, is the ability to adapt.Killing is just the result of another adaptation that may happen! No one is born to kill.The End!!!!!!
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

So animals was not born to kill either. Sometimes we question should we kill this person or not. Or other times we don't even question we just kill.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

So animals was not born to kill either.Several species of herbivores are naturally friendly creatures.Sometimes we question should we kill this person or not. Or other times we don't even question we just kill.You don't know the percentage of the human species that actually have that mentality. It needs to be a high percentage for your argument to hold.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Several species of herbivores are naturally friendly creatures.yes mostly all show a naturally friendly behavior but still until they are threaten.You don't know the percentage of the human species that actually have that mentality. It needs to be a high percentage for your argument to hold.we have evolved but deep in side us we kill. it does not leave you. just like a animal they can be so friendly but they still have that killer in side of them.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

yes mostly all show a naturally friendly behavior but still until they are threaten.Most of the time they will run away. we have evolved but deep in side us we kill. Yes we do sometimes kill ourselves on the inside, but that has nothing to do with this.it does not leave you.You haven't proved that it was ever there.just like a animal they can be so friendly but they still of that killer in side of them.Imafirinmylazuh! Blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Imafirinmylazuh! Blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah! wrong You haven't proved that it was ever there. your right I did not proved that was there because scientists studys proved that it was there but either way it still there. Yes we do sometimes kill ourselves on the inside, but that has nothing to do with this.I did not say that.Most of the time they will run away.ok your arguing with a person that worked with lions and tiger and wolves and other dangerous animals for 2 years. they don't most of the time run away
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

ok your arguing with a person that worked with lions and tiger and wolves and other dangerous animals for 2 years. they don't most of the time run awayAnd you are referring to animals that actually kill as a part of their nature and not all animals are like that.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

And you are referring to animals that actually kill as a part of their nature and not all animals are like that.I never said that
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Lions, tigers and wolves are all natural predators, so they kill to survive, so you did refer to those animals.And if you are just going to keep repeating the same thing over and over, then don't bother responding, because that's mostly what you've been doing here. Repeating the same thing, but just wording it differently. Eets n us! Eets n us! Beeleave eet becawse eye say sow! end nut becawse eye cunt divide a ballad raisin!
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

you need to look at your self responding in different words but meaning the same thing
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

you need to look at yourself in the mirror and you'll see that you're being a dumbass.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

dude do not respond if your not go to say something different
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

Something different.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

ggyjhgger rwfn adhg f4 yy7e ëíìó ìéû,ÿá ëíëëä òëòõæ öäá áñ ñôêó ä æ a
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Good for you.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

It's a product of letting Satan into your lives.
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

there is no god in this so please leave. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is apart of us

Ah, yes, that explains the Inquisition!
Debate: Is killing a part of human nature.
Side: it is not in us

I just noticed that "Side: it is not in us" has a persistent value (I cannot leave it blank). Assume it to be blank as I disagree with the basis which form the argument sides.Assuming there is only one "human nature" is not a logical standpoint - at least to draw any sort of valuable conclusion for a question so rich in ambiguity (imo) as this. The factors are many and often complex (environment, trauma, rebellion, religion, extreme circumstances, etc). It's instinctive if it means survival (fear, hunger, etc) so we might call those instances of killing the natural order of evolutionary biology (still ambiguous for my taste). My overall point is the seemingly limitless variety of perspectives existent in our collective minds on this Earth pretty much insists that circumstances so extreme will happen regularly (based more or less on the law of large numbers/averages). Harm reduction is the key.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

What do you mean by "humane"?
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

Oxford dictionary:adjective1having or showing compassion or benevolence:regulations ensuring the humane treatment of animals inflicting the minimum of pain:humane methods of killing
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

Well, compassion and benevolence are pretty subjective terms.However, most forms of lethal injection fit the third definition.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's Cruel

Silly definition. humans get much pleasure out of others torture. You don't find it bizarre people are willing to pay large sums of money to watch Saw films- depicting their fellow man being disemboweled for entertainment. Besides, other animals show just as much, if not more compassion both to humans and each other.But using your definition, no it is far from humane. Even if it is totally painless, it still inflicts mental pain on both the victim, and his/her family.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

I don't know? Let's try it out on someone from CD and see.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

Good idea.WHO'S FIRST?
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

I've got a few ideas, but I think I'll keep 'em to myself for now.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

Message them to me please :P
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

And now you want to have a conversation about who you are going to kill?Go see a psychiatrist.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

U guyz r Psycho.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

I do not see a wrong in killing someone after they killed 6 people or a 1,000 people. I just do not see it.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's Cruel

Then we should put all war veterans to death.
Debate: Is Lethal Injection Humane?
Side: It's painless

Your responses to this debate made me suspect that your replies were not particularly thought out. This comment assures me that there isn't much to your reasoning.The problem with whatisright's comment is that the executioner with the needle may have killed 6 to 1000 people but should not be put to death. The problem with your comment is a similar error, it lacks context and perspective.