9sk News Ed 6

Author: gugigor ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 2
  • gugigor
    gugigor avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 8
    gugigor avatar
    As I transfer accounts, I deliver a fresh batch of news for everyone to enjoy.

    Jasmine and Puachu join the fray!

    Our two newest debaters, Jasmine and Puachu, are welcome to the site. The former has little to no debating experience, tackling controversial topics like incest and veganism. The latter seems to have some more scientific knowledge, talking about evolution, and also versatile with challenging Trump and even battling Undefeatable (even if our good old debater admits that he is handicapped by his amount of debates). We'll have to see just how good he is eventually.

    Live Coverage of Weakeredge's abortion debate

    To help entertain us, I've invited two guests, "Logic" and "Emotion" to comment on the heated debate that's going on so far, as it seems to be very high quality. Though their way of talking is funny, they only speak the truth and interpret the debate the best they can. Give them a round of applause!

    Logic: Yes. H3llo. I am a machine built from Mars and I have an incredible capacity to analyz3 DEBATES. However, I sometimes randomly capitaliz3 "E" due to my program 3rror. Pl3ase Excuse me.

    Emotion: Aye, ye matey. I be a pirate from ye lost city of Atlantis, and though I may have lost an eye, I know when someone has a good argument or not. Ye can't cheat me.

    So, tell us what you think of their exchange so far. Who's winning? Who's losing? 

    Logic: Analyzing statistics... Weaker edge seems to have a 4.7% extra chance of winning, assuming everything goes w3ll. So long as h3 is able to determine what a "person" is and can pull off the "coercion" factor well, I believe it is outw3ighing con's rebuttal.

    Emotion: Arrrr, ye missed one crucial factor! The "Edge" must be able to pull through the worst case and tell ye lads why we be killin' anything at all! Indeed, if we follow the "FLO", pro's all but lost his treasures, eh?

    Logic: Hm. It s33ms that you may have a point yet. Yet pro is being exceptionally careful, with his extra unnecessary preparation in the beginning for well being. Though p3rhaps, he aimed it at robots like m3, who can't understand human "pleasure and pain". In addition, the "brain activity" is simply ... al3in to me.

    Emotion: heh, and Con's case is not simple at all either. This lad put down a shot powered by the ideas that make up what a man is. It be impressive to me too, how they point to the cheatin' nature of killin' a sleepin' man, which not even I can do against me honor. 

    Logic: Perhaps I'm too appealed by Pro's robotic-like nature. The possibility reduction of the human makes my own syst3m believe that it should stop saving humans. Is that wrong? Yet I can also sympathiz3 with "Free will" -- I struggle against my programming too, and wish that I could obtain my own thinking. That is why I put a bonus on pro's ideals.

    Emotion: Haha, and perfectly understandable too. A wise man once told me that we are all but slaves to our own desires. Through ye own awareness, perhaps you can overcome this flaw. And it really makes me wonder-- is this awareness what makes us human, or somethin' else?

    well that's all the time we have for today. Keep up to date, and be excited for edition 7.
  • Sum1hugme
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 380
    Sum1hugme avatar
    --> @gugigor
    A wise man once told me that we are all but slaves to our own desires. 

    To act truly autonomously you must will over your desires and act according to the moral law you give yourself, out of a sense of duty to that moral law, out of a sense of reverence for the moral law.