This is the first argument that I would like to give against the motion. I agree that some aspects of the educational system are already provided by the computer and yes, it is definitely true that you don't need a person to learn everything - education is a largely personal matter. However, if we eliminate the teacher-student interaction completely, a part of the educational experience will be lost. It's not just the act of standing before a class that makes a teacher a teacher, there's the whole social experience of learning - the working together, bouncing ideas off of one another, etc. People are always complaining about the loss of social contact that has come with the age of technology I fail to imagine what they'd be saying if the computer became the new teacher. Report this Argument
I first thank my opponent for starting this debate and now I shall begin.
I know most members of this website find semantics annoying and cheap but since I'm arguing for the PRO side of this resolution I still feel a need to point out an important semantic flaw. The Resolution is 'Computers CAN replace...' and even from reading Con's first argument you can see he has already admitted that it 'CAN' be done though he say's it would lose an important quality desired in a teaching environment. So by Con's own admission the Resolution has been affirmed PRO; that Computers CAN indeed replace human teachers.
For that reason alone Pro already wins this debate; but lets pretend I don't for the sake of making this debate longer and more entertaining. My following arguments will apply as if the Resolution were 'Robots will...' or 'Robots should...' replace human teachers. Well I suppose it would be more accurate had I put 'Computers' rather than Robots, but you cant talk about this subject without getting into robots. http://www.msnbc.msn.com... and the truth of the matter is (if you click on the link I just gave) Robots (a kind of computer) have ALREADY started to replace teachers. And all the things my opponent worries over being lost appears to have been programed into this robot teacher. She can even 'scold' a student if need be. So a robot is just as capable as a human in the teaching application.
Not to mention the advantages of having a controllable programmable teacher. Once we make all teachers robots you wont have messy problems that put your school on the news in a bad way when your teacher sleeps with their students. http://shavedlongcock.blogspot.com... You also can rest assured that the robot teacher will only teach what is in the school board agreed upon agenda. if your school said evolution would be taught, you wont need to worry about the teacher taking the personal liberty to 'make aware' their students of a controversy surrounding this topic if you don't want them too. their is very little you can do to censer human teacher's from teaching what 'they thinks important' that the school board doesn't.
Next off education is perhaps the most debt inducing expense any state has. Teacher Unions are often considered one of the strongest Unions out their, making sure they can fight for every dollar they can get in their salary. remove these humans you have to pay every week for the robots you only have to purchase once and you just made running the educational system financially possible to pull off without going into debt. Some of you might go 'isn't that slavery, to employ people your not going to pay but rather pay to own'. The answer is No. their robots no one cares. Robot labor is the closest we can ever get to slave labor again while it's still moral. I think we should not miss out on this opportunity.
So what do we want between the 2? Teachers that teach the things we voted on they should teach for sure and nothing else. True control over what our kids are learning? Do we want a real solution to state debt by taking teacher salaries out of the budget? Do we want to do the right thing and protect our kids...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document