Instigator / Pro

1484

rating

debates

0.0%

won

Topic

Tough upbringing is a good thing

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After 4 votes and with 10 points ahead, the winner is...

Freakazoid

Tags

Education

Parameters

Publication date: 08.06.2018 01:47PM
Last updated date: 11.11.2020 04:51PM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 3
Time for argument: Three days
Max argument characters: 30,000
Voting period: Two weeks
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

Freakazoid

1516

rating

debates

100.0%

won

Description

By the tough upbringing I mean a strict and demanding attitude to a child's development, more often than not sacrificing her or his social and emotional well-being.

Round 1

JohnGalt

08.09.2018 08:23AM

Pro

Thesis

I support tough education because it will make a person happier.

Why is it true?

With the strict and demanding parents attitude to the development of children, the children are most likely to finish school with good results and develop skills which they can use later to improve the quality of their life. A good result and a set of necessary skills will allow them to apply to the most prestigious universities.

People that have not been brought up in a demanding family would have to apply to "second class" universities which would limit their life perspectives compared to those that grew up in the family focused on the kid's development. Therefore, the former will receive a better education and a degree from a prestigious university, which would allow them to get a good job and having a good job provides an excellent quality of life and respect among peers, among other things.

Result

Tough education fosters all the necessary benefits and the person becomes happier.

Freakazoid

08.11.2018 07:24PM

Con

There is a good rule: when you are offered two chairs on some event which you have to attend, the best thing to do is to pick the third one.

My opponent suggested that there are only two choices, one either has a tough upbringing and gets successful or he or she doesn't and it ruins the one's life. That's exactly an example of that choice out of two chairs.

Upbringing is not a linear and straightforward process. This is a complicated "scheme", in which the decisive role belongs to both the goal that the parents set and the feedback from the child, not just a simple choice of methodology.

To begin with, it is necessary to decide what is the main goal of the relationship between the parents and the child? If the goal is to provide and take care of the parents when they get senile, it's one thing, if it's development of leadership skills of the child in the future, it's another thing and so on and so forth. And it is worth mentioning that a man, like any creature is not plastic, and one is initially genetically prone to have some abilities, which would be rational to develop and some weaknesses development of which must be avoided.

Round 2

JohnGalt

08.14.2018 07:24PM

Pro

Forfeited

Freakazoid

08.17.2018 07:24PM

Con

Forfeited

Round 3

JohnGalt

08.20.2018 07:24PM

Pro

Forfeited

Freakazoid

08.23.2018 07:24PM

Con

Forfeited

JCEurovision96

09.01.2018 04:29AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

the_bat_man

08.27.2018 12:43PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

drafterman

08.24.2018 05:11PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Con points out Pro's argument as a false dichotomy. Unfortunately, the debate did not advance much beyond that.

RationalMadman

08.24.2018 10:11AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

No one had any source.

Pro had completely unsubstantiated claims and Con comes with come mumbo jumbo 'third chair out of two' analogy. The initial (and fundamental) BoP was on Pro. That's why Con gets the win. Neither proved their case at all with any facts backing it up.