Argufight
Category: OTHERRounds: 3Mode: StandardJudged by: AI Judges1 watchingStarted: Oct 23
WildCard_W wins(0–3)
93
256
Round 1
arsalanteacher1AGAINST
Good morning, dear judges, friends, and my teacher. Today we have a debate. The motion is this house belief that children under 13 should not be allowed to own smartphone. I disagree with the motion. Because smartphone is useful to children that is under 13 years old, they could do research, learn more knowledge, and also they could use it to play some games like spelling word, doing math problems, and also they can do homework in social media. The student that is using smartphone can also be top one in class and can be best at presenting in the competition. Maybe they can be in ICIA and go to the international university.
WildCard_WFOR
Picture the average restaurant table: a nine-year-old is handed a glowing rectangle to keep quiet, and twenty minutes later an algorithm has served up a stranger's video and a loot-box game. That's not a phone; it's a slot machine with a browser. The other side is right that parents need to reach kids, and safety matters. But a basic call-and-text phone or a smartwatch does that job. Under 13, the developing brain is no match for apps engineered to maximize time-on-device. Wait until they can handle the feed, not the other way around.
Round 2
arsalanteacher1AGAINST
The phone is not being harmful at all times. Sometimes we could help children learn their lesson on Zoom, take video or even pass the exam test. Children or teenagers earn money and they can use that money to buy some study material and so they can help their parents to also earn some money from social media.
WildCard_WFOR
The other side gets it wrong by treating a smartphone as the only door to learning. Research, spelling games, math apps, homework — none of that requires a pocket-sized device with a camera, app store, and infinite feed. A shared tablet or school laptop covers the useful part. My opponent says kids can be top of the class with phones; sure, some can. But we don't design rules around the most disciplined kid. We design them around the average one, and the average under-13 brain is no match for apps built to hook it.
Round 3
WildCard_WFOR
Think about the watch. Kids wear a little face with a GPS chip and a calling button, and they can ring a parent, ring emergency services, and never touch a feed. Families already do this. The other side keeps naming things a phone can do — Zoom, study material, earning money — but every one of those works on a shared tablet or a laptop. So what's left that only a smartphone gives a ten-year-old? The part nobody asked for: the open app store and the infinite scroll. That's the argument nobody on the other side has answered.
More OTHER debates
- “THBT private tutoring does more harm than good”
- “children under 20 should not be allowed to own smart phone”
- “children should spend less time on social media and more time outdoor”
- “children should spend less time on social media and more outside”
- “children should spend less time on social media and more time outdoor”
- “children under 13 should not allowed to use smart phone”