Motion 1

This House prefers a world where success and failure are seen as a consequence of random factors,
rather than personal actions.

Arguments:

1. About inequality of birth chance argument

2. About adverse fate
3. About the surprise event

This government believes that success and failure are a result of random factors rather than a
result of personal actions. the arguments in favour of this motion are the inequality of birth chance
argument, the adverse fate argument, and the surprise event argument.

1. Inequality of chances at birth

First of all, since Greco-Roman antiquity, the role of destiny in human life has been highlighted
through significant symbolism: Moira, the daughter of chaos and night, represented for the Hellenes
the destiny established before every being by unshakable laws.

Among the Romans, fate- Fatum -was represented by a blind or blindfolded old man. He had
written the destiny of all people on a copper plate. The decrees of fate were distributed to every man
from birth. All religions, spiritual currents, stories of peoples describe the existence of this implacable
destiny, which man cannot change. If we analyse mankind from ancient times until today, we can say
that the individual or collective success of peoples are determined randomly and do not follow a
program or rules and cannot be influenced by personal actions.

For example, a child born in Africa in a poor country does not have the same chances of success
as one born in a rich family in another part of the world. However, if this child achieves success, it is
the hand of fate because it means that he was the actor of wonderful events that lifted
him out of poverty.

2. Adverse fate

The second argument is the argument of adverse destiny, which shows itself regardless of effort.
All of your life's work can disappear in an instant due to an unexpected event such as earthquakes,
fires, wars or even a stock market crash. Equally, you can wake up overnight that you are a successful
person because fate has put you in a favourable situation. a relevant example is the prime minister of
Romania from 1918. Alexandru Marghiloman, who until the age of 50 was spoiled by fate: everything
succeeded, he experienced family happiness, public honours, political ascension, parliamentary
success and wealth. From 50 to 70 he had about 20 years of defeats and disappointments. He is the
same man, with the same education, with the same friends, with the same concerns, and yet the
periods were different. Moreover, Marghiloman puts under the sign of destiny the establishment of
Greater Romania on December 1, 1918. "Great Romania was made neither according to political
conceptions nor according to plans. And then, my lords, let us bow our foreheads before a genius
greater than ours, before a plum that was wiser than us, call a providence, baptize her as you will.".

3. Surprise event

The third argument is the surprise event or mystery argument. the Government team believes
that you cannot command destiny: you can choose a coat, a school, a city to live in, but the
fundamental elements, i.e., birth, marriage, death, must be left to destiny so that the encounter with
the mystery does not disappear from our lives.