What if Doctors debated ABORTION? 

Had limited time this week, so I kept the debate short by giving the debaters a 10-minute limit. Hopefully, it still sparks plenty of thought-provoking discussion! As always, your ideas inspire these videos, so feel free to comment and upvote your favorites.

The debate was already bound to be better than what happens in politics when the Choice side conceded that life began at conception scientifically rather than playing games and jumping around an inconvenient truth like what we see

Now make them debate whether or not cereal is a soup

This debate felt weird in my opinion, because they constantly say "in my experience as" despite not being actual doctors.

Now do a Jewish A.I. vs Christian A.I. that debates if Jesus Christ is the Messiah or not.

Your channel is one of the best ideas I’ve ever seen. Love this. You need to turn this into a podcast. Literally just upload the mp3 as is.

I love these debates because they are actual debates, they are being objective while treating the theme at hand with it´s due sensitivity, if more situations like this happened IRL I´m convinced we would understand eachother better

The pro-life contender mopped the floor with the pro-choice bot.

Another great video! I am Pro Life and found myself answering the against side in my head and was happy to hear the pro side coming up with very similar or even better replies. Really can’t get enough of these videos. Thanks for taking in this topic! I’ll be re-watching this one (like all the others) so many more times!

I love how well thought out, how well formed and put together this is, and then I remember, yeah. Humans. Most will not watch this video, at-least fully. And actually care to see another perspective, but rather just go down here, to the comments, and begin fighting over the arguments that they themselves will never actually participate in, in any meaningful life changing way personally. I'd give my opinion on the subject, but that feels like it would dismay from my point. Please, watch the video, appreciate a nice, not screaming, high school debate.

I'd like to see a debate about Biblical Old earth vs Biblical Young earth.

Dr. Choice got 6 points Dr. Life got 8 points Saved you a minute.

Thanks you for this because i want a discussion of the morality and facts on controversial topics like adoption without the heated emotions.

Best response to the Violinist argument (on forced organ donations like kidneys) I've heard is that the uterus is the only organ in the human body that exists to grow ANOTHER (different) body. Credit to Stephanie Gray Conners discussing the question with Matt Fradd.

Or do Orthodoxy vs Catholicism vs Protestantism!

Im saddened that you didnt go deeper into the life vs autonomy argument cuz the logical extreme of autonomy vs life is suicide. We shouldnt force the person to seek help who actively are for suicide. Because its ultimatley there autonomy. This is a very problamatuc view that i wish the debators explored a little more if the right to life is an even more important right Maybe you can make a video on wether assisted suicide is moral or not. Which takes place in countries like switzerland

What i dont get is why no one promotes the use of condom and discourage rawdogging.

I think the quality of the argument here isn't as good when the AI is trying to argue from the perspective of an expert. A pro-choice Oby/Gyn probably would not have made the viability arguments as he/she would be very familiar with the current research and status of medical breakthroughs in keeping preterm newborns alive. Either way, I love these videos. Please keep up the good work!

All I gather so far from computers debating is that nothing is resolved or settled.

I've always wondered. What anyone at any age passed away (or aborted). Could have lived to become

people who claim abortion should be ok up because up to 24 weeks, the baby isn't aware he's alive, or he doesn't feel pain. Still don't think the mother should be prosecuted as a murderer if she kills the baby past that point. the only honest argument I have seen for abortion is "I value my life more than the life of my child". all other arguments are mere smoke screen

Both sides are just panicking to do the right thing as selfless as it can be. But neither side talked about definite death punishments to rapists

Evolution vs creation next please!

At some point in my life I actively tried to change my mind on this subject... I never heard much of a valid pro choice argument and the pro life side were very consistent. However, despite the consistency and rationnal of their argument I've never agreed... At first I thought I was just being emotionnal but after consuming more and more prolife content I arrived to the conclusion that I never thought the arguments were compeling cause it comes from a religious point of view. As an atheist, human life isnt inherently valuable. A human being is, but not human life itself. So yes life starts at conception. No debate here. But when does the fetus goes from a clump of cells to an actually human being. This is more complex of a question to answer. Also I'd argue that anyone who believe in an higher power. Ought to me pro life... I could see atheist be pro life also. But theist should all be pro life without exception. From a legislative stand point. IMO Fully banning abortion cause less harm than fully allowing it. But allowing it in a specific time frame and circumstance would likely minimized any harm done.

It seems that both AI's are in complete agreement when it comes to being against late term abortions

Finally. The blue woman is gonna smoke the orange guy, yet again.

For the survival of mankind, which is better: Selfishness vs selflessness

I asked ChatGPT O1-Preview to Define a Hypothetical Civilization and Find and Define the Middle Ground for abortion after uploading the transcript from your video. *BTW this would've been a great addition to this video topic*

There instances of fetus having congenital deformities that prevent the fetus from engaging in labour and delivery, it would just stay in the womb past 40 weeks putting the mothers life at great risk. Look up the case Savita Halappanavar, an Indian dentist in Ireland whose death due not being provided late term abortion (because of law following Catholic ban on abortion) resulted in a referendum in 2012 that the scrapped the abortion ban in Ireland, her fetus literally begane to rot inside her body causing sepsis and ultimately shock leading to death of the Mother. There also cases of immune incompatibility between fetus and mother where immune system of either recognizes the other as a threat leading to things like Erythroblastosis fetalis (were the fetus dies) or pre-eclampsia (which is fatal to the mother).

Loved this debate ❤ Thanks for making this!

May I request a debate about wether humans are essentially good or evil, just how Jean-Jaques Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes argued for their according philosophical standings?

Great video man, love the ideas

Dr. Life completely disregarded mother's well-being in favor of fetus's and focused on the potential that the fetus holds while ignoring the actuality the mother holds. It also focused a lot on opinions of other people, quoting different people and their subjective opinions on life rather then on objective facts on the actual issue.

Kinda want to see ai debate refugee intake, trans athletes in sports, forcing people to use pronouns, the war in Gaza. If it's in the news then ask AI

Pro life side should have answered differently about viability. Yes it's a moving, but babies don't stop relying on the mothers body when it's outside the womb. It still needs to be looked after and fed. You can't just leave it to fend for itself because it's not viable without human care.

I am surprised that the pro file agent did not question completely the argument of body autonomy. The pro choice AI said that there are case in which the pregnancy is caused by rape. That is arguable. But also mentioned about failed contraception. That should not count. The woman should be aware of the risk of pregnancy. She had a choice of having relations or not. Even with contraceptives that is a choice. The woman do not lose her choice power if abortion is not allowed in the case of failed contraception, she had a choice.

This is interesting. I always just assumed these AI’s would pick the more progressive side but apparently not. That’s really interesting. Now this process feels more trust worthy.

Less than a minute in and I’m already blown away. Look, I’m pro-choice, but I can’t stand when people on my side argue that a fetus isn’t alive. That’s like showing up to a debate with a blindfold and a “kick me” sign. You’re just begging to lose. The real question is personhood-that’s the whole ethical battleground. Where’s my 20-24 week squad at?

I’d love to see a debate about Morality: whether it’s objective or subjective ❤

I have watched everything posted on this channel, and historically this channel does appear to lean positively towards Christian ethics and beliefs. At the start of the debate, both acknowledge life begins at conception, which is not a consensus in the real world at all, and weighs heavily on the possibility of the debate. Disappointed that this would start in such a small scope. I also have seen that the woman picture for the ai historically wins all her debates. This channel may be pushing a Christian worldview more than trying to present arguments neutrally

I thought this was an extremely interesting and almost nuanced take by the AI. One thing that stuck out was the pro-choice argument on functionality and consciousness. I wonder if there was any input in the AI involving births that result in babies with diminished mental capacity. For instance, I heard in some cases for termination in circumstances when genetic defects are confirmed and such. Would have liked to see where the AI would go with that.

You know you have 0 arguments when you immadently side step the conversation, Even the Ai doesn't want to deal with the problem with Life and goes straight to personhood ignoring he prompt.

Just incredible! ❤

Yeah Dr.Lofe won his by quite a margin. I've never come across a 'pro-choice' argument that doesn't come with a better pro-life rebuttal.

Most people in the field of medicine side with the pro choice position, this debate does not represent the general medical opinion.

The problem with laws controlling abortions is very simple: Politicians are not doctors and they are not the slightest bit educated about the multitude of cases that are possible. Even if you are pro-life, you should have no problem conceding that medically non-viable pregnancies should be terminated. However, because Republicans have made sure that the clauses of the law that regulate exceptions are as vague as possible, doctors are refusing treatment even in such cases. Not because giving treatment IS illegal but because they don't even know whether it is

Would love a debate about consumption of animals

To the famous violinist question, I would respond that firstly, the violinist is dying. They are suffering from something and would die naturally without your aid. No one is forced to save a life. With a child, they are living and thriving in their natural, only, environment. It's literally a part of the human developmental stage and is a part of providing a normal level of care for one's child. The government does force us to take care of our children, and for children in the part of development, that's what it looks like to take care of them. Just like you can't neglect to feed your child while saying the government can't tell you what to do. No. You must feed and nurture your child, by law. That is not to say that we should neglect women in need. We should make sure they are given just as nuch care as the child. This is merely my counter argument to the famous violinist.

Ladies and gentlemen, the fundamental question is: Who is the master of life and death? There is a novella by Carl Zuckmayer from 1938 and a film based on this novella from 1955. This novella and the film are titled "The Master of Life and Death." As I write this, it is raining outside. We notice an increase in rain and storms. I have had an epiphany, wherein I have been told that all this heavy rain cannot halt the fire that will come from the heavens. We are once again in the days of Noah, but this time the deluge will not be with water, but with fire. Our society has become unbelievably depraved and godless. This is evident in how people dare to consider themselves the masters of life and death. This is one of the worst blasphemies against God, if not the very worst. That is why the issue of abortion is not merely the murder of an innocent child in the womb, but the blasphemy that underlies it. This is the most grievous sin. The wages of sin is death - the second death. Satan whispers to people that they have a right to their bodies, yet he omits that the body is meant to be a temple of the Holy Spirit. Just as cursing (which does not encompass the demand for justice for evil deeds unless one repents) and blessing (wishing good upon someone) should not come from the same mouth, the body cannot harbor both good and evil simultaneously. The entire debate surrounding abortion and its legalization only serves to illustrate one thing: society lacks compassion. When it is claimed that one must feel pity for women who wish to have abortions, that is true, but this compassion, as well as freedom, comes with responsibility. This responsibility is to God, who is the true and only ruler over life and death. Only one person who walked this earth had the right to decide about His life-to end it or not-and that was Jesus, the Son of the living God. Yet Jesus emphasized that life is sacred and that every soul has infinite value. He reached out to the marginalized and weak, to sinners and those who suffer, and proclaimed the message of love, forgiveness, and hope. Jesus spoke of the deeper meaning of life-that it is not solely about physical existence but about the spiritual and soulful connection to God. In today's world, where life is often seen as negotiable, it is more important than ever to recognize and embody this message. When people presume to decide over life and death, they forget that we are all part of a greater plan known only to our Creator. The challenge is to protect life and promote its appreciation, even in the most difficult situations. It is the duty of each generation to listen to the countless voices of the innocent and defend their right to exist. As we approach the issue of abortion, we should not only focus on the legal and political aspects but also on the moral and spiritual dimensions. As a society, we need to foster a culture of life in which help and support for expectant mothers and their children are paramount. Instead of supporting hasty decisions, we should create opportunities that acknowledge the value of every life and address the challenges many women face with true compassion. It is up to us to be the voice of hope and to spread the message of love. We must not fall into a ghettoization of human values, where life is seen as a bargaining chip. Instead, we should have the courage to stand up for the principles that have been conveyed to us by God. Through our actions, we can bring a ray of light into the darkness and convey the certainty that every life story is unique and valuable. Let us work to create a world where every individual, from the moment of conception, is regarded as valuable. Only in this way can we honor the claim of the true Master of life and death. It is this fidelity to principles that will help us grow and thrive as a community-during these times of trials and challenges. Amen.

Im actually pretty on the fence about this issue, so this should be really interesting. Edit after watching: neither was convincing. Neither was able to convincingly answer the fundamental question of if a fetus is a person, and all arguments beyond that are irrelevant until that is answered first. Dr choice tried by saying we shouldn't consider them people until they're sentient, but we don't know what causes sentience, so that's kinda a non-starter.

Can an AI give me some reasons not to skip to the end? 😅

Whoa whoa whoa, basing the value of life on the ability to feel pain is very inconsistent. What about people who have CIPA (people who don’t feel pain). Do they just not become a human because they don’t feel pain? Also, what about people who are in comas? They are completely helpless without outside help, just like a fetus.

Air on the side of caution , if we can’t seem to prove life exist any point why make assumptions and decisions in uncertainty?

How did you get ai to do this? Must have been really difficult to train ais and have them interact

Both sides agreed human life begins at conception in the first minute and half. How is there 11 minutes left? The debate is over.

This argument is based on the wrong premise. Why do we, on the right, always do that? We ALWAYS allow them to set up the framework and then we seek to “defend”! STOP with the defending! That’s the losing position. How about we start with, “abortion ISN’T birth control!” How about we start with, “If you didn’t want to be pregnant, then why did you set up all the conditions to become pregnant?” How about we ask, “You want bodily autonomy, then why didn’t you behave like you already had it before trying to kill!|| your very own flesh and blood?” QUIT DEFENDING on their terms! Make THEM defend on ours!!!!

Here before your channel blows up

I find the woman AI is always the "good guy"

You can't be pro-choice if your mom was not pro-life.

There is something holy about mother and child. The nature of giving life and sacrificing of one’s self to create and give life potential and opportunity to a being that has never been and will never be again. The symbol of mothers love and child souls be made holy again.

Make a Shia Islam VS Sunni Islam

Using Peter Singer for a pro-life argument is hilarious 😂😂😂

TL;DR I would like to see a normalization of each adjudicator debating against itself in order to see what its pre-conceived decisions are There are clear problems with these videos - For one, the debaters are clearly not zealous in advocating for their position. They share the same biases as the adjudicating AI, thereby making the debaters pretty much extraneous. - All of the AI is clearly biased toward popularity of the data it was trained on and not any form of reasoning. It cannot actually compare the validity of arguments, either in strategy or in adjudication. That's why it favors quantity of argument over quality and why it doesn't do very well at critiquing the opposing arguments - The worst sentiment that it has taken from us humans is that it assumes all logic is valid. Watch this person break when she has to reconcile "abortion is murder from conception" with "birth control and IVF trashes orders of magnitude more fertilized zygotes than abortion" : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-68aej2qmCtw.htmlsi=ERYk3481R-7V4eeF&t=4899

A.I. has a way of turning an interesting debate topic into something sooooooo dull.

No way, you did it!

The viability argument FOR abortion is so lame. A 2-year-old child isn't even viable by such a metric.

"Moral Principles should consistently protect those who cannot advocate for themselves, regardless of their stage of development" I think that sums it up

I do not think abortion can be ethically determined by mechanistic arguments; I think it depends on presuppositions about human dignity.

This is a pointless debate. In certain instances abortion should be allowed, and in some instances disallowed. It’s not something to be for or against.

Do a debate on a scenario where Abrahamic religions don't exist please.

Even AI can detect evil

Title should be: science from 107 years ago Vs. science today

Please do democracy vs anidemocracy

Dr. Life made the better argument. The premises for Dr. Choice's argument is inconsistent and mostly with little or no consideration of the little life form (fetus) with no voice.

Orange bot said 24 to 25 weeks. Please explain the baby moving at 12 weeks…still okay to k!|| it?

Do a Messi vs Ronaldo Debate ❤

The pro-choice AI only mentions the mother's autonomy in an offhanded way at the very end, and then the pro-life AI simply makes the blanket statement that we have a legal obligation to protect the vulnerable, and then it's just left alone. It wouldn't matter if the baby in question was a 30 year old with two doctorates and a Nobel Peace Prize, you cannot under any circumstance attach yourself to another person's body for any reason without their continuous consent. Even if you find yourself connected to that person by no choice of your own and your very life relies on being connected from that point, you have no right to that person's body without their consent, and they can choose to disconnect from you at any point that they like to regardless of the fact that that would kill you, unless you could absolutely demonstrate that continuing to stay hooked up to you would have absolutely no effect at all on the person who you would be hooked up to. Protecting others is supererogatory, and no person can ever be required by law to put their own body or mental well-being at risk to protect another person. Even if you agreed to protect that person at some point. If you were a babysitter, and you stepped outside for a moment, only for the house to go up in flames before you could get back inside, even though you agreed to protect those kids, no one can hold you legally accountable if you choose not to run back into a burning building to save them. You are allowed to consider yourself first. Now does this mean you're a pretty bad babysitter, maybe it means that. But are you a double child murderer? Absolutely not.

woah

I’m Catholic and I’m mostly pro life I truly believe they should be cared for and I still think abortion is bad and killing a human being but the being raped or contraceptive accidents should ( sadly and regretfully) have a choice Mr choice was right about that part along with life but still….its a conflict I a catholic go thru even if I were to talk to my parish n etc about it

I wonder what would happen if destiny would be facing off

Thought experiment hypotheticals force discussion to be boxed in to false narrative resulting in absolutes. They’re fun… but stupid.

Hey guys I got a question I was watching a video and it was saying how I got I got pregnant I was curious so I clicked on it but then it turned out to be a trans person who became a guy I was like that doesn't count So what do you guys think does count or no?

Can you doo liberal AI vs conservative AI? I never heard a debate like that without screaming and slurs.😂

Part 2?

Please make socialism vs capitalism

Make the screen black bro

Dr life cooked and is better

Pro-life all the way. If there ever was a law that has been abused more in not sure what it us. Millions of lives ending each year just because they are unwanted. Its a terrible shame.

Amazing how the male AI is always wrong

Ai debate the existence of evil.

Israel and palestine conflict next?

i think Dr. Life kinda cooked

Let’s be honest… the pro life cooked the other

I’m pro life.

I'd love to see a debate for communism vs capitalism. I think a very important topic as we see more and more of a dangerous rise in socialist ideologies in younger people.

do one on illegal immigration. great vidoes btw!

Abortion is bad. Next question

This is dumb, it's a philosophical debate, not a scientific one. Idk what the "AI Doctors" are here for.

Do Jesus vs Buddha vs Krishna or rama instead of Muhammad

First