How do I prove that one person CAN'T make a difference?

Question

I have to prove that one person can't make a SIGNIFICANT difference in a DISASTER for a debate class tomorrow and I don't know how!!

Answer 1

I would never agree with that statement, but all things are argueable.

Ok, I intend to prove that a person CAN'T make a significant difference in a disaster.

First, what is the difference that desires to be made.

Well, if were taking about physical difference (saving lives and such) then yes, people can do that. But what kind of difference does that really make, the person that you save will eventually die anyways. So no lasting difference there. To delay the inevitable is to do nothing at all.

If were are talking a spiritual/emotional difference, like consoling victims or such, we really make no differnce here. To consol someone is to merely bring out the strength or courage that they already had within themselves anyways. This would be done with or without an individuals help.
Though we try and help each other, which is also our nature, we never truly change a thing, only point to what is already there or delay the only end, thus Individuals make no significant difference in a disaster. This is not something that we should feel negative about, for it merely points to the inner strenght of our design and the inevitability of our destruction that is the human life cycle and the human condition.

Answer 2

Wow---poor you!!! Looks hopeless! You will be stuck with making an inevitably ineffective argument.

Statistics are on your side, of course, as one person rarely can or does make a significant difference in a disaster.

HOWEVER, if it can be proven that one person CAN make a significant difference -- and it can -- then your position simply won't stand up.

Most of the examples I can think of admittedly involve a single person who already has power. If, (in hindsight, at least), after Hurricane Katrina, (not to mention BEFORE the hurricane), the president had issued certain orders, and ensured they were carried out, a significant amount of suffering would have been averted. Granted, it takes many to execute the orders, but it only takes one to create them and put them in play.

Or -- think of the pied piper...

Or -- the disaster is the assignment your team received. Rather than put forth the appearance of trying to defend or prove what is in reality an error, you might singlehandedly save the day by declaring (proving!) that your assigned position is indefensible.

And --more basic to the point, as someone else replied to you, you cannot prove a negative.

Answer 3

Start by defining significant difference. Is it significant by size of the contribution, emotional impact of the contribution, or economic impact of the contribution. Also use the word "average" regarding the person. Say "an average person" could not make a significant financial difference. It is true that one person by themselves cannot make a significant difference. In order for their action to make a significant difference it has to have an impact and to have an impact, that takes other people to be impacted. Therefore one person on their own cannot make a significant impact.

Answer 4

That would depend on what you mean by disaster. Stay away from all the examples of one person making a difference. As Cincinnatus,Roosevelt and others did. Focus on, say, financial disaster, like Black Monday, where not even many persons could stave off disaster.

Answer 5

Argue that society inevitably creates "special men".
This way when somebody says "Person X made the difference by Doing S" you can counter -- well, if there were no "Person X" the society would have achieved S anyway(for example person Y would have achieved S instead)
Basically, point out that society as whole moves in certain way and depending on the directions of the movement certain men do stuff, but if these men did not exist - somebody else would INEVITABLY take their place!

Answer 6

That is extremely difficult.

I suppose you will have to look at an influencial disaster of our time. If you start with 9/11, take just some random person holding up an American flag. It doesn't change the world, nor does it make them patriotic.

Answer 7

Impossible!! It is not an appropriate topic for debate - we all know one person can make a difference. They might as well ask you to debate on why we should chop all the trees in the world down.

The purpose of learning debating in school is to open your mind to other ways of thinking, teach you to research, anticipate problems and to nurture tolerance in humankind for other people's thoughts, beliefs and reasoning. I would make my speech on why you can't debate this topic! Good luck.

Answer 8

All I can think of is if one is not motivated or cares enough to make a diffference, then it won't get done. But otherwise, it's very hard to prove that one person can make a difference. There is too much evidence that one can.

Answer 9

you have to define the significant events that would change the course of the disaster, and outline how they would require more than one person......example.....during katrrina theyw ere trying to pump the water out and rebuild the leviees at the same time...and rescue people.....each required a team, no way one person could do even one of the above tasks

Answer 10

But one person CAN make a difference.