DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.
I feel "Social justice" is just a grandiose way of describing our society's evolution, agitated by both our political climate and an ever-evolving social media landscape. If this is true, then social justice warriors are only those who see the current trend in social evolution and attempt to usher it in. While at times these "warriors" do lead to adverse reactions, I do believe they benefit our society.
They are good for social justice, but social justice itself is a bad concept. "Justice" in general is closely associated with the concept of karma, which is an esoteric Eastern concept having no grounds in reality. There is no reason to pursue any form of justice in a society, and instead we should focus on more tangible things, such as freedom and prosperity.
If people really want to pursue justice, then they can do it in a mutually consensual interaction with other individuals. Forcing justice on others through intimidation and violence is just wrong.
"Social justice", in my view, is the idea that people of all groups should be equal and that we should measure this "equality" via the outcomes of the groups. The problem with this, however, is that groups differ in many ways on average. As a result, the drive for "equality of outcome" leads to inequality of opportunity; certain groups which are underrepresented are granted preferential treatment. This, for example, means that Asians have to get higher scores to get into universities, because they are overrepresented. Seeking equality of outcome means doing away with fairness and equality of opportunity, which are the measures of egalitarianism that actually matter.
I think in todays world most so called SJWs are way too sensitive and refuse to even consider views, even when backed with evidence and/or statistics, that are contrary to thier own. It gets to the point where an average moderate person not only doen't want to engage with them, they tend to tune them out.
As far the SJW's I see protesting at Ben Shapiros talks on YouTube I think a more apt name for them would be imbeciles. I am not a Ben Shapiro fan, however, I'm not a fan of morons either.
No. And I think most of them are far too pro-censorship and authoritarian to even be liberals. I call them the Alt Left.
1. If Libertarian Free Will exists then we are the Ultimate Cause of Ourselves. 2. But we're not the Ultimate Cause of Ourselves. 3. Therefore, Libertarian Free Will does not exist.
1. If Consciousness is real then illusionism is false. 2. Consciousness is real. 3. Therefore, illusionism is false.
1. With regards to consciousness, either (a) Radical emergence is true, (b) Dualism is true or (c) Panpsychism is true. 3. (a) and (b) are false. 4. Therefore, Panpsychism is true.
SJWs are not good for social justice for several reasons. SJWs overstresses political correctness and they often try to get rid of freedom of speech.They also never actually try to understand opposing views and dismiss them as evil, which shows how incompetent they are.
Debra AI Analytics      +   
  Considerate: 53%     Substantial: 68%     Spelling & Grammar: 89%     Sentiment: Negative     Avg. Grade Level: 11.18     Sources: 0     Entity Sentiment Detection: political correctness    social justice   freedom of speech.They   views  
____________________
  Political Analysis: Very Likely Republican And Slightly Libertarian  
I think the phrasing of the question is ridiculous. We need to define what an SJW is and what is "Social Justice". We then need to find a way to measure if SJW's are good for it. Your question actually reeks of a bias and is more of a statement. What you mean is "I think SJW's ie the people I hear about on Breitbart and Fox News as wanting to take away muh freedoms are scum". So what we are in fact debating is your prejudice.
Wikipedia defines social justice as: "a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society. This is measured by the explicit and tacit terms for the distribution of wealth, opportunities for personal activity, and social privileges."
This means that the fairness and justness of the society is measured by equality of outcome. As I mentioned above, the problem with this is that groups differ in many ways on
average. As a result, this drive for "equality of outcome" leads to
inequality of opportunity; certain groups which are underrepresented are
granted preferential treatment. This, for example, means that Asians
have to get higher scores to get into universities, because they are
overrepresented. Seeking equality of outcome means doing away with
fair treatment and equality of opportunity, which are the measures of
egalitarianism that actually matter.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 17%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.64  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 87%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 13%  
  Substantial: 21%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.28  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.76  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
If people really want to pursue justice, then they can do it in a mutually consensual interaction with other individuals. Forcing justice on others through intimidation and violence is just wrong.
  Considerate: 92%  
  Substantial: 96%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.04  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 86%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.58  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 72%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.82  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: todays world    average moderate person   views   point  
  Relevant (Beta): 67%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 26%  
  Substantial: 37%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.44  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: Ben Shapiros talks    Ben Shapiro fan   YouTube   apt name  
  Relevant (Beta): 88%  
  Learn More About Debra
2. But we're not the Ultimate Cause of Ourselves.
3. Therefore, Libertarian Free Will does not exist.
1. If Consciousness is real then illusionism is false.
2. Consciousness is real.
3. Therefore, illusionism is false.
1. With regards to consciousness, either (a) Radical emergence is true, (b) Dualism is true or (c) Panpsychism is true.
3. (a) and (b) are false.
4. Therefore, Panpsychism is true.
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 44%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.92  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: Alt Left    censorship   liberals    
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 53%  
  Substantial: 68%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.18  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: political correctness    social justice   freedom of speech.They   views  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 46%  
  Substantial: 94%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.12  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
Wikipedia defines social justice as: "a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society. This is measured by the explicit and tacit terms for the distribution of wealth, opportunities for personal activity, and social privileges."
This means that the fairness and justness of the society is measured by equality of outcome. As I mentioned above, the problem with this is that groups differ in many ways on average. As a result, this drive for "equality of outcome" leads to inequality of opportunity; certain groups which are underrepresented are granted preferential treatment. This, for example, means that Asians have to get higher scores to get into universities, because they are overrepresented. Seeking equality of outcome means doing away with fair treatment and equality of opportunity, which are the measures of egalitarianism that actually matter.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra