azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

I did not say that all people in social netwroks are maniacs or prisoners. It can be so. I also have an example when one woman socilized or chat with one guy, she almost fall in love with him and said him about it. Then she offered to meet. What did he say? He was a prisoner and sat in prison, and asked her to bring him some clothes and food. It turned out that this man had several women, who was falling in love with him and forced them to protect him in prison. Is it a good side of social networks? When I sai it I meant that in social networks there many different people, whom you do not know well and familiarity with bad persons can lead to terrible consequences.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

Wait: you can use a mobile-phone or a PC in the prision?...For me, this is fake
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

I think its fake.To start: you cant use mobile-phone or PC in the prision.To contnue: that sound so much like a tipical film/history
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

It is not an index that several millions or billions people are registered in social networks that making friends in social networks is better than making them in real life.  And I want to add that using chatting abbreviations orshortcuts in your study writings can lead to many problems with your appearance at university. Because this habit can effect your writing skills and it become part of your regular use, which can also create proper spelling problems. That is why making friends in real life is better and more reliable and more real than doing it in social networks.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

I think in real life to make friends because you actually see the friends and you spend time with each other. You dont know who the person is behind the screen
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

Without any doubt its better to have a face-to-face friendship.I connected with a few people online and I wouldn't call them friends until I'd spoken to them properly and met. They say "Dont trust online-smiles". Well there are a lot of illusions when you are online.Nothing can substitute life communication.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

I`m for making friends in real life. I don`t want to say that all people in Internet are maniacs, crazy and horny. Nevertheless, you can not be sure in person sitting on the opposite screen`s side. Moreover, it is impossible to know person from different sides. You can chatting with one person, but in real life he/she can appears in absolutely another image.I think,that friends it is those people with whom you have similar interests. There are a lot of opportunities to make a friend. E.g. at school, work, university and etc. It is more easily to understand a person face to face and determine "Who is who?"There is no necessity to risk and waste time!
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

Who said that people from Internet are your real friends? We call people friends, though we have met them only 1 time, I think that any person meet real friends in the beginning of his life. Everything is checked by time and friendship is no an exception.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

May be it can be more easily to find our a friend in Internet than in real life, but outcomes of making On-line friends can be very,very deplorable. According to statistics 99% of on-line acquaintances ending failures. Of course, in Internet you can find person with ideal photo or profile, but there is no guarantee that person on this photo will be the same, as it was indicated in his/her profile.Moreover, it is better to say nothing about cases of pedophilia. Of course, I cannot agree,that making friends online so hopelessly. I know the couple, who met in Internet and even married. Probably it is exception from general rules.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

I advice you all to make friends at real life becase I had an expirience with a friend. We talk every day at msn and we are like best friends but in real life we don' t even look each other or say ''hi'' to each other. This made me very sad and now we are like strangers... But however some people can try not to fall to this sichation
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

in my opinion it is much better to have friends in real life, because friendships are more fun and there are also several tasks that can be done in person, such as: go for an ice cream, go for a walk and among many others.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

I discordo because if you don't have whatsapp 2, você don't consegue se socializar right, ok? Abraços!
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

I sei men, it's even difícil quando people domt geth these coisas
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

I fico agradecido que você support me, que a whatsapp 2 update, esteja com você!
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

Uh... I'm very socially awkward, so it's kinda difficult to me to get to people and make a friendship come out of nowhere, I mean, I think I'm cool and have a nice personality and all because I don't have difficulty to be friends with someone once I know them, but yeah, even though it may be hard to me to make friends in real life and so much easier to get into virtual relationships, I still say it's better to have friends in real life because it's kinda tough sometimes when you have that friend you made in a social network and one of you are feeling bad in some way and there is nothing you can do to help each other, it may be very emotionally hurtful.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

In my opinion it i better to make friends anyway, but there can be some problems to socialize with someone from another country. What will you do? Nowadays it is very developed sphere, i mean social network. And it is not problem to make friends with someone, only after that to see him/her in real life. You can choose by some criterias. Style may be appearance can influence to your deicision, and you can socialize with your friend 24 hours per day. I think there more advatages to make friends in social networks rather than in real life.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

It is impossible to sit in internet in a prison. And you can make friend with someone, after that socialize with him, to learn him/her better, and finally to meet with him/her. You are not going to find out someone and at once meet with him/her. Basically, it is best way to learn more about this person, by his/her photoes, comments, hobbies are available in his/her main page. For instance, our family friends and my daddy's collegues are married 7 years ago. Firstly they found out each others in mail.ru social network, after that they socialized a lot, then started to call to each othr and only after a lot of month they met. And it was their first date. Is it bad? Are they maniacs? or prisoners? NO, it is better to make friends in social networks.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

There are a lot of social networks such as vkontakte, moy mir, facebook, twitter where you can not only socialize with someone. You even can to play onine games, to see each others photoes, to make comments, to orginize interview, to listen to music and more... If your parents are very strict, and you can not meet with someone at night or in the evening, how will you make friends? surely, in social networks.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

Surely no. Firstly, it is not required to make friends at night or in the evening. I personally can make friends even in the afternoon or in the morning, it does not matter. Secondly, our topic is about making friends, not about listening to music, playing games and etc. I am not against socila networks at all. I do not agree that making friend in social networks is better than in real life.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in real life

True indeed if your parents are strict or if you can't go out to see your actual friends you could get on a social network. But the problem is that nowadays most of the people you meet on a network if you haven't ever met them in real life are fake, pervs, or predators. Not saying that all networks are like that or that all people on there are like that but you never know. A predator can play the role of a trust worthy person for a while and get your information and who knows what else. It's just more safe to make friends in real life.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

As a statistics shows facebook is the most popular social network, in fact more than 750 million people are rigistrated there. twitter users are about 200 million people. vkontakte more than 100 million. And this is only active users who visits social networks every week. What about just registered wih are visits not as often as active users, Facebook +640 million, Ozone +480 million, haboo and twitter +200 million, Myspace and orkut + 120 million, bebo and vkontakte +115 million, tagged and badoo +100 million. And it is far not all. Finally more than billion people are using social networks.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

In my point of view, internet becomes part of our life. We also should consider it like simple meeting someone in the street. In any case people can lie both in internet and during face to face contact. It depends on you, to believe or not. For me, it is easier to comunicate with someone by chats and social networks. You can analyse the context of speech. (What to say, how to answer and etc.)
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

Nowadays we have more friends in social network rather than in real life. Sometimes you have problems, but you can`t share it with friends in real life,so in network you don`t know the person and easily you can share everything what you have in your mind. Also it`s good if your friend from another country, you become more open-minded, you will get new information, you will know their traditions, i think that`s sound is really nice. We spend a lot of time for internet and chatting, but also we have to have close friends in real life.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

Surfing the internet is popular recent years, and more and more people would like to make friends online.In our pinions,making friends online has many advantages.Firstly,we can communicate with strangers with no worry about the embarrassment which may happen in face to face talk.Making friends online make us more comfortable especially when we are shy.Secondly,we will meet new people from all over the world,and learn different cultures in different places,which can surly widens our eyes and makes us become more knowledgeable.Thirdly,Connecting with people especially from English-speaking countries through Internet can also improve our English level.Personally,I think it’s a pretty cool thing to have several foreign friends .In a word,required by China’s reform and opening up,advancing with the world’s development becomes a necessary task of our generation.Therefore,making friends online doubtlessly can be made use of,as an important and efficient way,to achieve that due to its own features.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

i have a question. Making frends in real life is involved in many emotional and personal sensations.So it must be accompanied by a quarrel, embarrassment, disgust, hypocrisy, traditional code of conduct and so on, let our heart tired. But in the network to make friends, we can only communicate with our favorite people, to do the most true of our own.So aren't they the most reassuring friends?
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

Though i agree on both sides, people in person will often judge someone before the 5 minute period you can study them during conversation. What i mean by this is when you see someone new and engage in conversation, first impression on the topic decides subconsciously how they supposedly think there as leading to a misconception that you should, or should not trust them. Several key points I would like to explain would be the idea in which if only social media relations existed, how would people be quick to understand what someone may be like considering you cannot see them at a large factor. This also combats the social idea, without seeing them, you may happen across an exceptional manipulator, not the proper term though that's beside the given point. Either way, you're bound to misjudge someone, though looks are an extreme illusion in modern society because we were raised that people with horrid intentions dress and act mischievously, though in actuality, most of those people blend in perfectly in looks, I personally would rather use proxy and meet online than meet in person and risk them knowing far more about me and the way i think and react to every situation. I would love to understand all points of view so please, consider both points I've made and make your own conclusion.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

I dont know who is better in general, but I think it have not to be bad to communicate with social networks
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

It is better on social networks because we can talk to people who are close and also from other countries, thus increasing the variety of vocabulary
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

Who said that people from Internet are your real friends? We call people friends, though we have met them only 1 time, I think that any person meet real friends in the beginning of his life. Everything is checked by time and friendship is no an exception.
Debate: what is better: to make friends in real life or in social networks?
Side: in social networks

I believe that everywhere, but on social networks we have the chance to meet people from afar and thus get acquainted with other languages.
Debate: Is religion good or bad for the world?
Side: religion is good

It's like asking if culture is good or bad for the world. Or if government is good or bad for the world. Or if language is good or bad for the world. Or if grouping up based on shared beliefs/values is good or bad. It's a false choice question because religion in and of itself is neutral.
Debate: Is religion good or bad for the world?
Side: religion is good

Kind of. Its like asking if a culture is bad for the world, or a government, but religion is a willful system of belief and therefore more open to good/bad impact criticism than, say, culture. Culture is unavoidable. Religion is an optional poison that needs to be extracted from society. And while religion might be neutral in the way democracy is neutral, that doesn't mean we cant observe its implementation and accomplishments, such as they are, and judge it based on what we see. Religion might sound good in theory, but we've given it an inflated view of itself and fanatics are allowed to infringe on the freedom of others based on their unprovable beliefs.
Debate: Is religion good or bad for the world?
Side: religion is good

Criticizing specific aspects of a specific religion is one thing, criticizing religion in general is totally pointless. You argue that culture is unavoidable, but you think maintaining "willful systems of belief" is in and of itself harmful? How is it possible for a person or a society to refrain from establishing belief/value systems? The notion of doing away with religion is as naive as the notion of doing away with government.Who is doing more infringing on the freedom of others, governments or religions? The enforcement of belief/value systems is the business of government like it or not. The position of being against religion in general is either dishonest or delusional. We are opposed to systems we regard as too different from our own, not systems themselves. Standards of proof vary, proof consists merely of what is convincing. All beliefs are proven to the satisfaction of those who hold them.
Debate: Is religion good or bad for the world?
Side: religion is good

criticizing religion in general is totally pointlessYou think considering the merits and pointing out the flaws of religion is totally pointless? My fundamental argument is that religion is unnecessary and society will be better off when it's gone. but you think maintaining "willful systems of belief" is in and of itself harmful? How is it possible for a person or a society to refrain from establishing belief/value systems?Maybe you should go back and read the entirety of the sentence you lifted that quote from. I said it the fact that it is a willful and optional system of belief makes it more open to 'is it good/bad for the world' criticism than culture, which is an unavoidable consequence of human beings interacting with one another. The notion of doing away with religion is as naive as the notion of doing away with government.No, i don't think humanity can stay this stupid forever. But you're right in saying that the cancer of religion has taken very deep roots in society, so much so that many people cant imagine a world without it. Indeed, in my country we have religious groups that think the world will be possessed by demons if society isn't run by god, or rather, religion. Who is doing more infringing on the freedom of others, governments or religions? The enforcement of belief/value systems is the business of government like it or not.Exactly! And it is NOT any business of religion to be enforcing delusional, unprovable beliefs, its the business of the government to decide how the country is to be run, hopefully one run by the people. Religion has no place infringing on freedom, but it does anyways. And, as i said, feel free to open up a debate where we can talk about the merits of government and its impact on the world. Personally i think its done its good and its bad but it's not as fundamentally rotten as religion, it has a greater basis in reality, and society would be worse off without it than without religion. But that's not what we're discussing here, so while it has use as a metaphor i don't see the point in asking if governments or religion do more harm, because it's a perfectly valid question and invites me to compare the necessity of religion to that of government, and religion comes up short; it's a question to be asked elsewhere but it doesn't help your cause here. We are opposed to systems we regard as too different from our own, not systems themselves.I am opposed to the system of religion. How can i not be opposed to religion? And can someone not legitimately be an anarchist, opposed to the system of government?All beliefs are proven to the satisfaction of those who hold them.Okay, sounds good. Tie this to your argument again for me if you please, because I'm missing it.
Debate: Is religion good or bad for the world?
Side: religion is bad

I think perhaps we should back up here and i should ask you what you think religion means. When i think of religion i think of faith and/or organized religion, fair and accurate interpretations, i think, whereas you seem to use 'religion' and 'belief system' interchangeably, also a fair interpretation, but one with a different connotation. Because i see religion as faith (unexamined belief that defies reason) and clergy (humanity's headlice) i think this colors my opinion that religion is bad for the world because i think faith is more of a curse than a virtue, and clergy exist for the benefit and empowerment of clergy, a cause i cant stand behind. But addressing how you seem to see religion - it seems to me that all religion is a system of belief but not all systems of belief are religious. Wouldn't it therefore be possible for humanity to retain systems of belief while also ditching religion? To still have ideals regarding morality, politics, and ideological pursuits while also being bereft of scripture, religious oppression, clergy, temples, worship, and submission?Right. You can consider the merits and point out the flaws of specific sects, but not religion in general.Why?Now maybe you should give a go at answering the question I asked. I think that religion of one form or another is unavoidable. It's not like a person can decide not to have a belief system.I tried to claim freedom as my religion, but that was only to get a tax break. But to humor you: forming a belief system is unavoidable; forming a religious belief system is avoidable. Despite my earlier sarcasm, i am completely and utterly without religion, so my existence negates religions omnipresence. Were stupid if we think belief systems can be done away with as opposed to improved or made worse.Hey, we agree on something!Religion is not something that comes along after a society forms and attaches itself to it and "takes root". Religion is foundational to society. Societies don't form without commonality of belief/value systemsReligions have migrated and evolved and otherwise came along and attached themselves to various societies. You only need to puzzle out how Americans ended up worshiping the tribal god of the ancient Judean desert and his Palestinian son to see it. And i think that looking back at history and saying that we need religion to form society is a cheap shot; I've stated that region had its role to play in the past, but we do not need it to impose or even offer beliefs in order to have beliefs. So you admit that government enforces whatever belief system (religion) is prevalent in the region.No. Governments often willingly or unknowingly fail to do that. I'd be interested to read an explanation from you about how a government differs from a religion so I can logically disassemble it and show that there is no substantial difference.I can tell. Open up a proper debate on it and I'll post, i promise.
Debate: Is religion good or bad for the world?
Side: religion is bad

criticizing religion in general is totally pointlessReligion is specifically a set of beliefs that exist outside of science, determined through philosophy and story-telling. If a religious belief can be tested, similar to science, then that part of it is science and not religion.By this, if one asks if the influence of non-scientifically based reasoning can have a negative impact on society, then yes, it's very much NOT a pointless question.