Debate With Friend: Video Games improve useful skills.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 4 votes and with 19 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Games: Online/Offline Activities that cause fun and happiness.
We're focusing on Online games, such as Fortnite, Minecraft, Overwatch, etc.
Little Private Debate for Fun.
The reward circuitry in your brain is one of the reasons video games are fun. Your brain releases a neurotransmitter called dopamine, which regulates the feeling of pleasure from video games. When dopamine activity happens in the nucleus accumbens, the pleasure center of your brains, you feel joy.
When you play video games, your brain releases a constant dopamine supply, with occasional random bursts. Over time, your brain gets used to this steady supply of dopamine, and the nucleus accumbens requires even more dopamine release for gaming to feel fun. That prevents you from enjoying anything that is not as stimulating as a video game.
Still, too much time with digital devices can cause problems. Digital eyestrain often leads to dry eyes and puts an extra burden on the muscles that help the eye focus. Also, the eyes do not blink as frequently when looking at digital devices, which causes faster disruption and evaporation of the film of tears that protects the surface of the eye. That can cause minor eye irritations such as burning and stinging.
My position in this debate is to prove that video games do NOT improve useful skills.FRAMEWORK:PRO: Has to prove with sufficient evidence that Video Games improve skills that could be useful later on in life.CON: Has to prove with sufficient evidence that Video Games don't improve skills that could be useful later on in life.BoP (Burden Of Proof) is shared between both people.Meanings:Video Games: A game played by electronically manipulating images produced by a computer program on a monitor or other display. (Credit: Oxford Languages)Skills: The ability to do something well; expertise. (Credit: Oxford Languages)
Another dangerous thing is dopamine addiction:The reward circuitry in your brain is one of the reasons video games are fun. Your brain releases a neurotransmitter called dopamine, which regulates the feeling of pleasure from video games. When dopamine activity happens in the nucleus accumbens, the pleasure center of your brains, you feel joy.When you play video games, your brain releases a constant dopamine supply, with occasional random bursts. Over time, your brain gets used to this steady supply of dopamine, and the nucleus accumbens requires even more dopamine release for gaming to feel fun. That prevents you from enjoying anything that is not as stimulating as a video game.
- Dopamine Addiction
- Eye Damage
- Toxicity
- Social Isolation
- Games teach you how to survive.
- Reading. Studies show that kids who play video games may get a small boost to their reading skills. ...
- Visual-spatial skills. ...
- Problem-solving. ...
- Social connections. ...
- Imaginative play and creativity. ...
- Video gaming careers.
- Reading. Studies show that kids who play video games may get a small boost to their reading skills. ...
- Visual-spatial skills.
- Problem-solving.
- Social connections.
- Imaginative play and creativity.
- Video gaming careers.
Neuroscientists should think twice before getting patients to play video games as a way to boost their brainpower, a new study conducted at Université de Montréal suggests. Because in many cases, gaming can do more harm than good.
Concession
Argument - R1, Who came out better in R1 is "almost" a foregone conclusion. With Con opening out with a couple of good arguments about video gaming addiction and how too much gaming can be bad for the eyes.
Pro - Pro responds with: "ahh yes see games don't hurt you or anything playing Minecraft is just is to find a way to survive like how to survive and the same for other games.", which is a little insufficient. It lacks real argument. Rebuttal. Or any kind of effort. A special argument is required to bounce back from this.
R2 - In round 2 Con acknowledges my sentiments regarding Pros response precisely, writing: "PRO has posted an argument with no regard to the framework. As you can see from the framework, PRO's responsibility was to disprove my argument and set up his own."... In fact, Con appears to even begin to offer arguments on Pros behalf. Arguments which Pro barely brought up with what little he wrote. "PRO argues the fact that games, such as Minecraft, don't contain violence and teach you how to survive. ".. The one argument that Pro may have brought up was responded to by Con
Pro - In round 2 Pro thankfully avoids losing by foregone conclusion by providing a more thorough argument at last. In fact, he makes some very good arguments by producing a list of Pros for video gaming. The one I agree with most is "careeres", as it is true you can make a career out of video games and gaming. and this is very interesting "Video games can improve reaction time, attention, and short-term memory in older adults, research shows"... In fact, given Pros bad start, I am surprised just how interesting and good his R2 argument is. He has done enough to draw even at this point, though I would like to have seen some source and citation for those studies.
R3 - It seems that Con also shared my sentiments regarding Pros sudden whooping of Cons ass, by writing: "At first I admired the speed of PRO's ability to improve, but I realized it was a little TOO fast." But then Con accuses PRO of plagiarizing, writing: "I called PRO out on plagiarizing a web page for his argument, and PRO admitted to it!! This will definitely affect votes, but nevertheless, I will rebut this argument.". and Pro does appear to admit to it, writing: "ok I made a mistake", so before voting I will have to check the voting policy regarding plagiarizing. For the rest of the argument Con acknowledges the good that may come from video gaming, but wisely points out that there are other better activities available where those skills can also be honed, and ends it by pointing out the negatives.
Pro - Pro admits his plagiarism, and does partially agree with Con that playing video games for too long is not good. He also points out that kids that play violent video games may act aggressively. So Pro ends the debate admitting to Plagiarism and partially agreeing with Cons argument.
Here is the terms regarding Plagiarism.
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
"Plagiarism is passing off the intellectual property of another as your own. Plagiarism poisons the very spirit of debate. Plagiarism is such an extreme offense, that even if identified outside the debate it may be voted with prejudice against the offender in all categories. While there exist minor cases that do not necessitate such grave sanctions, the determination of the degree of it generally rests with each voter.
An argument dependent upon plagiarized material lacks any leg to stand on once said material is dismissed.".
I have the option to view the plagiarism as serious, which means I can vote against Pro in all four categories. Or, if viewed as a minor case, I can use my discretion.
Argument - Plagiarism + ending the debate partially agreeing with Cons argument = Con
Sources - Pro produced "10 Negative Effects of Video Games | Healthy Gamer", and raised concerns about his opponents copy and psate tactics regarding source material - Con
S&G - I was able to get the gist of what Pro wrote - Tie
Conduct - Pro was courteous enough to admit to his plagiarism. And if we read the terms and conditions of just how big a violation plagiarism is, admitting to it is pretty much the equivalent of a concession. - Pro
Conceded by Pro...
Arguments: PRO's argument proves the resolution because he focuses on proving that video games help refine useful skills; CON's claim that video games affect health bad overall does not disprove the fact that some useful skills are caused by playing video games. The resolution was worded heavily in PRO's favour.
Sources: PRO plagiarized his entire argument, whilst CON used linked reliable sources, which he commented upon
Spelling and grammar: PRO claims in R2 that video games help gain reading ability. I should play more video games then because I could not understand a word of what he wrote. Wait actually, I did understand a word of what he said, but the lack of punctuation and proper syntax mean CON gets this point.
Conduct: CON gets this point because (1) CON was on point without waiving, (2) PRO plagiarized without a link, (3) CON was overbearing with PRO's "cheat" and expressed himself very diplomatically in R3
yeah but it is from those browser facts so not really but yeah thanks for tip
.......
what no I JUST FORGOT ADRIAN (sry for caps)
Turns out he plagiarized the whole thing. I'm not sure if that's allowed, but I'll ignore it.
Your R2 argument was suspiciously good compared to your R1 argument. Just remember to post sources IF you copy/past text from other websites.
Like it says in the description, this debate is purely for fun. To answer your question, we're focusing on some mainstream games and debating they're overall improvement of life skills.
Some do and some don’t. Monument Valley and Minecraft is definitely better than some shady browser game.