If All human brains can share knowledge in one second, then they should do it
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 3 votes and with 9 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
let there be some magic that allows all humans to share knowledge in a telepathic manner, occurring within one second. The other person can memorize this instantly and understand the concept as well as the sharer. Knowledge: facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. I support this magic.
- In the resolution, “All human brains” is the subject. “They” means “all of them.” By omitting a qualifying word before the word “knowledge,” PRO implies that we are speaking of all knowledge. His constructive confirms this sentiment. Thus, the resolution roughly means “If all human brains can share all their knowledge in one second, all of them should do it.”
- If even one person should not share all of their knowledge, then the resolution fails.
- WORLD SECURITY
- MENTAL HEALTH
- PERSONAL CONFLICT
- GENIUS COMPLEX
“With all human knowledge able to be shared within one second, you would know how to solve all the problems in the world that can be solved.”
“All the criminals would be known and likely caught. Any secrets kept by corrupt politicians would be open to the public.”
“Con's article points out a huge weakness in his argument: "The brain’s exact storage capacity for memories is difficult to calculate. First, we do not know how to measure the size of a memory. Second, certain memories involve more details and thus take up more space; other memories are forgotten and thus free up space. Additionally, some information is just not worth remembering in the first place."
“because this is magic, there is no guarantee that it won't be compact enough to fit your brain size. Next, even with 2.5 PB limitation of knowledge, that is still incredible and you can choose to remember the stuff that is most important and significant to yourself. This is not a problem.”
“Secondly, con assumes the worst in any situation, would your personality and motivation be completely changed by having all human knowledge? The people who would still somehow be petty enough to do crime would be also wide exposed (as knowledge of them being a criminal is shared),”
“He thinks that we are sharing traumatic experiences, but we are only sharing *knowledge* that something occurred, not the feelings and the tragedy that occurred with it.”
“He assumes that knowledge is the only thing we strive for, but there are countless things that even all humans combined do not know, such as how the universe begun, the solution to the millennial math problems, so on and so forth.”
“He also assumes that being a genius makes you arrogant, but everyone is on an equal footing, and hence no one would have this advantage”
“He states that the vulnerabilities would be known, but the ways to improve it would also be known.”
“I shall also bring up that educated people commit less crimes and thus will make the world a better place if everyone is "educated”
Even if this is the case, the potential effects of cyberattacks, nuclear Armageddon, and the inevitable breakdowns in diplomacy, and many other impacts outweigh.
Also consider that PRO will not be able to access his impacts as stated in the 1st Contention of CON’s case.
“ Remember that human motivation is a key factor, and having all the knowledge shared by everyone would lead to greater understanding among people and less likelihood that people would commit crimes and exposing people who are unwilling to change. “
“Firstly, in my opinion, because the title claims "share", it would seem logical for the storage space to now be expanded to 7 billion people's worth of storage space. Since each person can easily retrieve information like 7 billion computers in a cloud system (which exists in real life), this new system seems highly plausible within this scenario.”
“Secondly, experiences are indeed, not facts, nor information. You may know that "this person got abused", but you won't have to experience the pain and the suffering that they went through.”
“Thirdly, con continuously asserts that terrorists will still somehow hold motivation enough to take down the government and cause a massive slippery slope, but this is pure speculation.”
“Fourthly, just because you have all human knowledge does not mean you cannot explore more. Consider how experts and geniuses in their field think they might know everything there is to know, only to explore new ideals every single day.”
Again, PRO misses the point here. This isn’t about “research.” “Growing and improving and accumulating wisdom are integral parts of living. Giving people all knowledge known to man at once bypasses the process entirely.”
“Consider the idea that all diseases could be cured. World hunger could be ended. And reasoning for war would drop severely as now everyone knows how to create a good reasonable government system.”
Finally, even if these impacts WOULD happen, consider that PRO cannot access them because of Contention 1.
“The hackers themselves would unfortunately have to reveal their location and information, as well as the fact that they want to hack the system. “