Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
1
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#4470
Do humans want validation or we need it?
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Winner
0
3
After 3 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
Bella3sp
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Twelve hours
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Six months
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
3
1524
rating
53
debates
75.47%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Con
#2
Not really going to go for something formal, this one is simple.
As con, I assume that I am debating "Humans need validation" and pro is debating "Humans want validation".
Let me just confirm the definition of need:
: necessary duty : OBLIGATION
Humans need validation, I need validation to go into the zoo. They need to validate my passport. These are examples of when we are required to need validation.
Now, I assume if you were here you want me to prove it in terms where we aren't required, per say? Well, with my definition if it is an obligation to have validation for something such as if my project looked good or not, then yes, we still need validation. Feel free to contest my definition, there are other routes to take.
Round 2
Pro
#3
Hello con ^^, thanks for accepting my debate!
Anyways, validation is considered to be a secondary human need under the commonly known theory of Maslow's law of hierarchy. Implying that acceptance of others is required for an individual's well being.
Thoughts/beliefs make perceived reality. And these formulated thoughts (via internal perception and external stimulus) mould our behaviours and can manipulate our feelings. So yes, reality can be a matter of perception. The choice of needing validation can exist just as much on plane of not needing it. Especially as it's not something concrete.
If we break down to the literal meaning of validation I e. "conformation of an act" on oblivious situations like praising a child to share toys or validating your passport, then I totally agree but if we take it in the sense of "approval of others is mandatory for a person's lifestyle choices in order to attain good mental health" that's where I part.
Con
#4
Yeah, thanks for creating the debate. All my thanks goes to you, no need for thanking me.
I'm going to start where pro makes their actually argument:
If we break down to the literal meaning of validation I e. "conformation of an act"
So, verification per say. Sure.
On oblivious situations like praising a child to share toys or validating your passport, then I totally agree but if we take it in the sense of "approval of others is mandatory for a person's lifestyle choices in order to attain good mental health" that's where I part.
You agree? You seem to take it into another direction, but do you agree?
Now for the main part of your opposition.
Are you now taking into account mental health? I wasn't really going to go that route.
I gave my definition. It is an obligation, our need. Your example is void because "mandatory" does not mean a need. And I don't think validation is always something with mental health, thought it can be. I need validation before attenting mental health services, kinda funny, huh? So, it can tie into that if needed.
When there is something for validation, we need it.
Round 3
Pro
#5
1) Here, the validation con is using is in its literal form. Verification of an act in order to operate in a systematic way of a place( entering the zoo, validation of passport) while I am referring to the contextual meaning(life choices, acceptance of others about what you do). Both valid.
2) Mandatory may not be synonymous to need but when its mandatory, you NEED to do it.
3) "I don't think validation is always something with mental health, though it can be" and that's exactly our common ground. Validation does not effect mental health as its not that important to the point its lack of it crumbles healthy mental functioning. Its nice but we can go on well without it.
4) Validation aint the right word here, that's encouragement
I gave my definition. It is an obligation, our need. Your example is void because "mandatory" does not mean a need. And I don't think validation is always something with mental health, thought it can be. I need validation before attenting mental health services, kinda funny, huh? So, it can tie into that if needed.
So carrying my point
A normal, self content human can perform well without the constant approval of others about their individualistic choices(how they look, how they are or how good they do something)given that they are open to criticism, growth. Hence, validation is not a need.
Round 4
Con
#8
Sorry for late rounds forfiet.
1) Here, the validation con is using is in its literal form. Verification of an act in order to operate in a systematic way of a place( entering the zoo, validation of passport) while I am referring to the contextual meaning(life choices, acceptance of others about what you do). Both valid.
Repeat:
"Let me just confirm the definition of need:
: necessary duty : OBLIGATION
Now, I assume if you were here you want me to prove it in terms where we aren't required, per say? Well, with my definition if it is an obligation to have validation for something such as if my project looked good or not, then yes, we still need validation. Feel free to contest my definition, there are other routes to take."
2) Mandatory may not be synonymous to need but when its mandatory, you NEED to do it.3) "I don't think validation is always something with mental health, though it can be" and that's exactly our common ground. Validation does not effect mental health as its not that important to the point its lack of it crumbles healthy mental functioning. Its nice but we can go on well without it.
Refer back to above.
It does have a mental affect. Consider:
My family died, and I blammed it on myself (for a reason that really, wasn't on me). That is something mentally draining for someone, so, validation would extremely help that persons mental health.
Yes, it does play a part.
A normal, self content human can perform well without the constant approval of others about their individualistic choices(how they look, how they are or how good they do something)given that they are open to criticism, growth. Hence, validation is not a need.
What defines normal?
How they look is based on society, how someone sees how good you look is based on the other person, society. Thats validation.
How good they do something is not up to you, you can think you did good on you project but in reality, get a F. So, you need validation.
Also consider what a "need is"
...
Vote con.
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:
forfeits..............................
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:
Pro bailing on the first round was fatal to their position because Con opened up with a very literal interpretation, which was clever. I thought Pro had a chance to bring this back, because the need vs want contextual is psychological, however, Pro flushed it when they admitted to the literal meaning of the word.
Everything Con said was true. Ergo Con wins.
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:
Con's argument relies heavily on their proposed definition of need, but it is never directly challenged. It's clear that validation is required in some circumstances, and Pro calls Con's description of the resolution "literal." Hence, if I take the resolution at face value, that would favor Con as well.
The debate title was more of a question than a proposition.
Its something I have been pondering really hard on and yes, it may seem confusing, I know. What are your thoughts on this topic?
Not mutually exclusive. I forgot what the fancy word for this fallacy is, but I am pretty sure that the topic involves a fallacy here.
My bad, i'll post my argument next time.