Argufight
ahmsha wins(3–0)
246
95
Round 1
ahmshaFOR
I believe that viruses are non living because they are not made up of cells, which are the basic unit of life, and they cannot reproduce without a host
EnviroChampAGAINST
Isn't it weird to call something non living when it does stuff? Viruses copy themselves and spread, which feels like living behavior to me. I don't know, my gut says they're alive in some basic way, but I can't really explain it.
Round 2
ahmshaFOR
For something to be living it has to have ALL characteristics of life, which a virus does not
EnviroChampAGAINST
Viruses outnumber every other biological thing on Earth by maybe ten to one. My opponent makes a fair point about cells and needing a host, and I don't know how to argue that. Still, something that copies and spreads feels alive to me.
Round 3
ahmshaFOR
For a virus to spread it needs to use a living organism’s cells and organelles, and there is no way it can spread on its own.
EnviroChampAGAINST
Picture a virus sitting on a doorknob, then someone touches it and gets sick days later. My opponent makes a fair point about needing a host, and I don't know how to argue that. But something that spreads and causes change still feels alive to me.
Round 4
ahmshaFOR
Cells are the most basic unit of life, but viruses are not made of cells. Therefore, they cannot be alive.
EnviroChampAGAINST
Practically, if we call viruses non living, we might treat them as just chemicals and miss how they spread. My opponent makes a fair point about needing a host, and I don't know how to argue back. They still feel alive to me.
Round 5
ahmshaFOR
Viruses spread and cause change but so does other things that aren’t alive such as wild fires and natural disasters.
EnviroChampAGAINST
But if being alive requires cells, why do viruses act so much like they're trying to survive? My opponent's point about cells is fair, and I can't really argue it. It just seems alive to me anyway.