Instigator / Con

1465

rating

debates

25.0%

won

Topic

#4395

Robots are going to increase the quality of life for humans

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 6 points ahead, the winner is...

Mast3rDebater

Tags

Life

Technology

human

Parameters

Publication date: 04.16.2023 11:46AM
Last updated date: 04.25.2023 04:33PM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 2
Time for argument: Two days
Max argument characters: 600
Voting period: One week
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Pro

Mast3rDebater

1500

rating

debates

100.0%

won

Description

Simple as said:
Pro - agree w/ (Robots are going to increase the quality of life in humans)
Con - disagree w/ (Robots are going to increase the quality of life in humans)
Players play fair (no aggression)
And judges (open voters') vote fair accordingly to the players arguments (no favouritism based on past debates)

Round 1

zing_book

04.16.2023 05:17PM

Con

Increased automation and use of robots could have unintended consequences. For example, you get a very different feeling of speaking to a robot. A patient may become reassured by the human touch of speaking to a nurse who smiles and emphasises with them. A robot could be very depressing because it feels informal, non-human. For some services like health care, education, the personal touch is an important, unquantifiable aspect of the service. If we push for more automation, we may lose out on valuable personal interactions and our quality of life may be diminished - huge impact on social life.

Mast3rDebater

04.17.2023 05:47PM

Pro

I agree with you in that regard, however, going back to the actual statement, I'd argue that robots are going to increase the quality of life many other ways. Let me use an example, think about all the construction workers that allegedly died during the construction of the several football stadiums made for the world cup held in Qatar last year. All those deaths could've been avoided if we simply had robots carry out these difficult jobs. Sure, just like with any other invention, there will inevitably be good and bad consequences. In this case, I believe the good outweighs the bad and it's not even close.

Round 2

zing_book

04.17.2023 07:04PM

Con

Regarding the fact that you said that many died due to construction etc. But have you ever thought of the increasing temperatures causing global warming? People often buy robots to do household chores for them disregarding the fact of exercise - but a robot leads a mass in pollution. They could also enhance unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, especially if our dependency on rare metals for production of electronic equipment further deepens. Proliferation of all sorts of electronic equipment and future composite materials also bring new challenges for recycling and waste management.

Mast3rDebater

04.18.2023 04:33PM

Pro

Though your point on pollution might seem reasonable, it is not an insurmountable problem. As technology advances, I'm certain that we humans will find a way to minimise this pollution, just like how we've seen in the past with electric cars emitting less greenhouse gases then engine cars. Regarding your point on "exploitation of natural resources" and usage of "rare metals", just like with pollution we will surely find a way to optimise recycling and invent new "waste management" technologies which can be further utilized to save so much more resources other than just metal used for robots/electronics.

zing_book

04.19.2023 11:32AM

ty Best.Korea for voting

Hs400

04.17.2023 06:17PM

Bro it doesn't matter how disturbing the robots are, they literally will improve QOL no matter how you look at it.

zing_book

04.16.2023 05:10PM

-->

@Best.Korea

yes indeed its lovely for all the work to be done for us, but not all of us can manage exercise as a separate task so its quite nice to take in chores as a way of exercise deceiving ur brain

Best.Korea

04.16.2023 01:31PM

The technology tends to do both harm and good. But sure, it would be nice to have my own robot to do the work for me.

Slainte

04.19.2023 05:02PM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Not the strongest debate I have read. Pro brought up the construction safety argument. It was a tangible one, and directly improves human life by reducing occupational death. The burden was met. No sources, conduct fine. Con had so many places to go and did not.

Hs400

04.19.2023 02:17PM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Both were not significantly better in any regard, but in my personal opinion Pro provided much more connvincing arguments.

Americandebater24

04.19.2023 02:12PM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

The debate is undoubtedly intriguing, with both sides presenting compelling points. However, neither argument is sufficiently developed to be more convincing than the other, and neither Con nor Pro utilizes any sources. The framework could be improved for both parties, but neither side displayed rudeness or greater professionalism than the other. If the debate had extended beyond two rounds or if Pro and Con had used sources to substantiate their statements, a decision could be made. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

Best.Korea

04.18.2023 06:34PM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Con's arguments:
1) different feeling of speaking to a robot,
2) the personal touch,
3) we may lose out on valuable personal interactions,
4) a robot leads a mass in pollution,
5) increasing temperatures causing global warming,
6) disregarding the fact of exercise,
7) unsustainable exploitation of natural resources
8) dependency on rare metals for production of electronic equipment further deepens
9) new challenges for recycling and waste management.

Pro's arguments:
1) deaths could've been avoided if we simply had robots carry out difficult jobs,
2) we humans will find a way to minimise pollution, just like how we've seen in the past with electric cars emitting less greenhouse gases then engine cars.
3) "exploitation of natural resources" and usage of "rare metals", just like with pollution we will surely find a way to optimise recycling and invent new "waste management" technologies which can be further utilized to save so much more resources other than just metal used for robots/electronics.

I am leaving arguments as a tie. This is because there is no way for me to compare the results of robots and pollution, when no numbers were given by either side.

Sources werent used. Tie.

Legibility was good on both sides. Easy to read. Tie.

Conduct was fine on both sides. Tie.