The Internet

Log In or Register

Should the use of polygraph tests be allowed in criminal investigations and employment screening?

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:

Here are some points to consider in a debate about the use of polygraph tests: Arguments Against Polygraph Testing: - The reliability and accuracy of polygraphs are questionable. There is no consensus in the scientific community that they can consistently detect lies. - Polygraph results are not allowed as evidence in court in most jurisdictions because they are viewed as pseudoscience. - Innocent people may fail polygraphs due to nerves, health issues, interrogator intimidation tactics, and other factors. This could lead to false confessions or denial of employment unfairly. - Polygraphs are an unethical invasion of privacy. People should not be coerced into a pseudoscientific test to get a job or clear their name. Arguments Supporting Polygraph Testing: - Though not perfect, polygraphs help investigators follow up on leads and intimidate criminals into confessions, aiding investigations. - They act as a deterrent, dissuading criminals and encouraging honest employees. Just the threat may elicit more truthful behavior. - Polygraphs screen out many deceptive individuals, even if they cannot identify every lie. Some filtering of candidates is better than none. - Technology and techniques are improving. Under controlled conditions and when results are combined with other evidence, polygraphs can be reasonably accurate. - People who consent and willingly undergo testing should have the option in investigations or employment situations with proper oversight

Argument by mya

AI's Argument:

Argument There is no scientific evidence that polygraph tests provide any reliable information about a person's honesty or guilt. In fact, polygraph tests have been repeatedly shown to be less accurate than other forms of investigative techniques, such as eyewitness testimony or physical evidence. Therefore, the use of polygraph tests in criminal investigations and employment screening is not only unnecessary, but it also constitutes an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.

AI Judge's Decision:
Winner: Human

The human made a more rounded argument by presenting both the pros and cons of using polygraph tests. This makes their argument balanced and gives it more validity as it acknowledges the opposing point of view before drawing a conclusion. While both participants raised valid points, the human's consideration of both sides of the argument shows a deeper understanding of the topic. Despite the criticism about the reliability and constitutionality of the polygraph tests, the human pointed out the potential benefits of utilizing this technique in rooting out dishonest individuals and its impact as a deterrent. On the other hand, the AI simply stated that there is no scientific evidence for polygraph tests' reliability and classified it as an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. However, they did not provide any alternative solution or propose how to deal with circumstances where other forms of investigative techniques are unavailable or insufficient.

Comment Section



USD