Return to CreateDebate.comjaded • Join this debate community

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day


Debate Info

3
1
Society Individual
Debate Score:4
Arguments:5
Total Votes:4
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Society (3)
 
 Individual (1)

Debate Creator

joecavalry(40130) pic



Should laws protect the individual or society? Who do they currently protect?

 

Society has allowed the human race to reach the current standard of living.  Societies are instrumental in the creation of the technologies and distribution systems necessary to support seven billion people.  Societies do this by creating and enforcing the laws/rules that nurture the environments that lead to such creations.  Without society, we would all be living in huts eating organic foods.  

One society was able to reach the moon (not one individual, not one corporation).  But in order to reach the stars, you need societies working together; you need governments.  The role of government is to come up with, and enforce, laws that incentivize  corporations and individuals to increase our standard of living (to help the human race reach the stars).  Governments are a tool/instrument used by societies.  Without governments, there would be no iPhones.  Apple needs governments that are willing to enslave a segment of their population in order to make cheap iPhones for Apple who will then turn around and sell them with an outrageous markup in order to fill their coffers with money (which is another instrument used by societies).

Only governments can issue money.  This may change if some corporations become more powerful than some governments.  But technology is a two edge sword that cuts both ways.  Technology also empowers the individuals.  Currently there's a battle raging between governments and individuals/terrorists who use technology as a means to achieve their end.  Maybe someday the technology will be sophisticated enough to allow an individual to issue/print money.  All battles are about acquiring more power.  The battles are resolved when the combatants find a balance that is acceptable to both of them.

Governments need to find a balance between empowering individuals and protecting itself.  This is why some laws make no sense.  For example, what is the point of protecting anyone who is detrimental to the society?  The answer is that governments need individuals to protect it from other individuals.  If governments made laws that only protect society and not the individual, then the individuals may no longer be incentivized to protect the government.
The gay marriage debate was about whether or not gay marriage was going to harm society vs empowering gay individual to get married.  Although there are some hold outs, it seems like the debate is pretty much done.  The outcome seems to be that gay marriage isn't going to harm society any time soon.

Society

Side Score: 3
VS.

Individual

Side Score: 1

As always, I try to present a couple of opposing points of view and provide no answers. The future is in the hands of the next generation. You guys figure it out. I'm going to go and play video games ;)

Side: Society
joecavalry(40130) Clarified
1 point

BTW, the following did NOT fit in the description:

The abortion issue is about whether society gets more value from unwanted children vs more value from "unburdened" women. The problem here is that societies need more young people than old people. But they also need working individuals. A woman who is at home taking care of children, can't work to her full potential. Governments can fill the gap by creating incentives for illegal emigration but at the cost of upsetting their "native" low end workers.

So maybe we should look at each conflict/debate as a battle between the individual and society that will ultimately result in a law that will try to balance the needs of both.

Side: Society
1 point

Laws should protect human rights and at the same time protect the interests of society.

Side: Society
1 point

Laws protect society, as they should. Society decides laws, by voting. Individuals may vote, but individual votes mean very little.

Side: Society

This article talks about how laws harm individuals but could "potentially" increase our standard of living. It is interesting to note here that nothing on this planet is free. There is a cost even if the cost is not borne by you and even if the cost is not immediately apparent.

http://www.salon.com/2014/10/24/siliconvalleywilldestroyyourjobamazonfacebookandoursickneweconomy/

Side: Individual