Introduction
The Internet provides many learning resources that can help improve
our intelligence. However, some believe that using the Internet
too much can actually do harm to our brain. Using the Internet too
much is called Internet addiction. Today our debaters will discuss
whether Internet addiction does damage to our intelligence.
Constructive
Debater 1 Henry
Internet addiction harms our intelligence. An IQ test is a great
way to measure our intelligence. Multiple studies show that people
who are addicted to the Internet score lower on IQ tests than people
who are not. Also, people with Internet addiction are more likely
to sleep less. The brain does not work as well when someone lacks
sleep.
Debater
2 Ashley
Internet addiction does not harm our intelligence. Internet addiction
is a problem that affects many people. It may do damage to our eyesight,
hands, or back, but not to the brain. Our IQs are highly influenced
by our genes. It is true that our IQs can change over time. Nevertheless,
I do not think that Internet addiction can affect our brain enough
to change our IQs.
Rebuttal
Debater 1 Henry
Ashley, why do you think our brain would not be affected by Internet
addiction? I admit that researchers need to do more work on how
Internet addiction affects the brain. However, I am sure that someday
they will discover more evidence proving that Internet addiction
affects our intelligence. Our IQs can change based on how we use
our brain. Spending more than 10 hours on the computer everyday
will surely harm our brains’ abilities.
Debater
2 Ashley
You admit that researchers need to do more work on how Internet
addiction affects the brain! There is not enough evidence to show
that Internet addiction harms our intelligence. I think that Internet
addiction can affect other parts of our bodies like the eyes, hands,
and back. However, the brain is a much more complicated body part.
I do not think it can be easily damaged.
Judge’s
Comments
The winner of today’s debate is Ashley. Henry committed the logical
fallacy called argument to the future. A debate commits this fallacy
when he or she argues that future evidence will someday be discovered
to prove his or her point. Henry should not have depended on future
evidence to support his point.