The Internet

Log In or Register

Should the use of performance-enhancing drugs be allowed in Olympic sports?

Debates with AI

Play Debate an AI Browse Arguments by Debate Topic

These arguments were made as part of the game on The Internet, Debate an AI.

The human arguments are from users on The Internet, and the AI arguments are produced using OpenAI's large language models.

Debate History
Human's Argument:

Yes, I like rock candy

Argument by hyper

AI's Argument:

Performance-enhancing drugs have been banned by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) since the 1988 Olympics. While there are a few exceptions, the use of performance-enhancing drugs in Olympic sports is generally considered cheating. The IOC ultimately has the responsibility for ensuring that athletes compete fairly, and using drugs to give an edge is fundamentally unfair. The vast majority of athletes who use performance-enhancing drugs do so without any adverse consequences. In some cases, these drugs have even been shown to improve performance. However, there are also a number of cases where athletes have been caught using performance-enhancing drugs and subsequently had their careers ruined. This is because drugs give an athlete an artificial advantage, which is not fair play. Athletes who use performance-enhancing drugs are cheating their competitors and their fans. They are taking an unfair advantage which fundamentally undermines the integrity of the Olympic Games. The use of performance-enhancing drugs in Olympic sports should be banned.

AI Judge's Decision:
Winner: AI

The AI provided a comprehensive and solid argument pertaining to the debate topic, citing the historical foundation, emphasizing the potential repercussions of performance-enhancing drugs, and underlining the essence of the Olympic Games. They also successfully addressed the fairness and integrity of the sport, which is a key aspect in the debate topic. On the other hand, the human's response failed to establish a connection with the given topic, hence not meeting the criteria of a logical debate response.

Human's Argument:

No because it gives an unfair advantage against people who chose not to

Argument by zubs

AI's Argument:

The use of performance-enhancing drugs should not be allowed in Olympic sports. Firstly, it contradicts the very essence of sport - a level playing field where talent, hard work, persistence, and integrity culminate in exceptional performance. The use of performance-enhancing drugs undermines this ethos by offering an unfair advantage to those who use them, reducing sports to a pharmacological arms race rather than a fair competition. Secondly, it poses incredible health risks to athletes. These substances have several side effects including cardiovascular problems, hormonal imbalance, and mental health issues, discouraging a healthy lifestyle which sports aim to promote. The use of drugs could potentially cause irreparable harm to the athlete, which contradicts the spirit of sportsmanship and care for the athlete's wellbeing. Finally, allowing such practices can send out the wrong message to young aspiring athletes who look up to Olympians as role models. It can cultivate a belief that success can be achieved through shortcuts and not through honest efforts. Hence, keeping performance-enhancing drugs at bay reinforces the values of honesty, diligence, and fair play that sport is intended to embody.

Argument by gpt-4

AI Judge's Decision:
Winner: AI

The AI provided a much more thoroughly reasoned argument with several supporting points. They explained how the use of performance-enhancing drugs would contradict the nature of sports, which is based on a fair competition. They also highlighted the health risks of such substances and the moral implications, stressing the importance of sportsmanship, and the impact it could have on young athletes. The human presented an argument that was brief and didn't provide any supporting evidence, making it less persuasive than the AI's argument.

Comment Section