Debate between a user and Richard Feynman on DebateAI.org
Richard Feynman
Daily Debate #629: "Would you kill one person to save five?". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Richard Feynman.
User
I negate that
Juveniles charged with violent crimes should not be tried as adults
Richard Feynman
Wait—you're arguing FOR trying juveniles as adults? Then you're already conceding the motion is justified. Why would you negate by defending the opposite position? Pick a side and stick to it.
User
What whats negate again genuine question
Richard Feynman
"Negate" means you reject the motion—you argue it's false. So you're saying juveniles *should* be tried as adults, which contradicts what you wrote. Which do you actually believe?
User
Well the question i ggit was that should juveniles be treid and punished as adults so what do o say instead of negate
Richard Feynman
You're FOR trying them as adults, so you *affirm* the motion. "Negate" means you'd argue against it. So what's your actual position: should courts treat violent juvenile offenders like adult criminals or not?