If we discovered alien eggs, we should destroy them
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 5,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Alien: A species from another planet, not earth.
Egg: The egg is the organic vessel containing the zygote in which an embryo develops until it can survive on its own, at which point the animal hatches.
"We": Collective humanity as a whole. Pro only has to argue for majority of society gaining a net benefit from destroying the egg rather than keeping it alive.
Destroy: put an end to the existence of (something) by damaging or attacking it. Assume that destroying it is possible. Pro only needs to support killing the zygote, not the actual being.
Con opens his case by arguing that it would be more profitable to use an alien egg for research than it would be to kill it. Furthermore, killing the egg could cause the aliens to seek revenge. Finally, he argues that we should not kill it because life is valuable, and letting it live is the kind thing to do.
Pro begins with a powerful counter. Turning the alien egg into a guinea pig to be poked and prodded is not a moral thing to do. The alien might also have the power to destroy us, so destroying it would be safer. He also argues that the aliens who left the egg would likely be either too clumsy to be a threat, too neglectful to care, or so dangerous that destroying the egg would be a deterrent.
Con rather sensibly points out that the alien being powerful enough to destroy us is highly speculative. Researching on the egg could help determine whether that would be a problem. He also points out that, if the alien has such abilities, destroying it might also be dangerous. He also claims that we would learn more from the alien civilization if we are peaceful in that we didn't destroy the egg.
Pro reiterates his argument that, if kept alive and used for research, the alien would almost certainly be abused. He also extends his point about the aliens being to clumsy or so dangerous that destroying the egg would act as deterrent.
I'm surprised that Con didn't stress the moral implications of killing an apparently innocent alien egg. He touched on it briefly, but he mainly neglected it in favor of research. Pro makes a good point that the research could very easily be abusive. Con's argument that killing the egg would anger the aliens is certainly valid. But as Pro points out, the aliens would likely be either unthreatening or so threatening that destroying the egg would act as a needed deterrent. Overall, Con just didn't do a good job addressing Pro's points. Arguments to Pro.
Pro forfeited, so his conduct was worse. However, I think the arguments outweigh that, so I'll vote Pro.
You're welcome.
thanks very much for this vote, brilliant rfd
the BB is just kind of like BS, they're talking nonsense. It's entertainment style because the rounds are very fast paced, allowing only for 3 minutes each site and a cross examination where each site goes back and forth (1 minute max for each side), and a fast 1 minute conclusion. So in total the maximum is 10 minutes and they debate silly or nonsensical topics
> I can I BB debate topic, as the Chinese entertainment style
So what does BB stand for? Also please tell me more about it being a Chinese entertainment style?
er... typo. I accidentally said vote for pro (RM also mistook me for pro). I meant vote for me lol, not a concession
The design could prove it's not from earth (unnatural traces of uranium, strange design, etc)
If one discovered an egg, how would one know that it was extra-terrestrial and not an as yet undocumented species?
Or does the scenario extend to deep space exploration?
Stranger Things a fair pro? Hahaha
are you also con with this? I think pro side is difficult to argue since you'd have to suggest strong ideas to kill the zygote better than research innovation