The Instigator
ShadowKingStudios
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
Ozzyhead
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points

Best Evidence Supporting or Discrediting the BoP as a Necessary Requirement in DDO Debates

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
ShadowKingStudios
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/15/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 430 times Debate No: 61732
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

ShadowKingStudios

Con

Simple.
Each debater must provide their best evidence that "Burden of Proof" is or isn't a necessary requirement in DDO debates.
Pro must present evidence it is a necessary requirement.
Con must present evidence it isn't a necessary requirement.

Voters the only two criteria to which this debate should be judged is Most Convincing Argument & Reliable Sources. NO NULL VOTES. If you don't agree with either debater, do not vote.

Pro must present his/her case in Round 1. Your argument is your acceptance. Writing your acceptance only in Round is an automatic forfeiture. You must pass Round 2.
Ozzyhead

Pro

Providing the burden of proof (BoP from here on) is necessary in debates in which someone is trying to explain something that is true. Many, MANY debates on this website go along the lines of "does a god exist?", in which case, a claim that has not been proven is asserted. In order for someone to rationally believe something, the BoP lfalls on the person making the claim.
Using the scientific method of observation, hypothesis, testing, recording data, and concluding is how all of us, even if you believe in a deity you have at least used the scientific method in some form of your daily life, to accept something as true or to solve a problem.
BoP should always fall under the person making a positive claim such as 'god exists' or 'ghosts exist' or 'there is an afterlife' or 'there are souls'. No one who has made these claims have met BoP. And a personal experience is not reason to believe anything.
BoP is important to meet when you make a positive claim. Otherwise, a debate is pointless.
Debate Round No. 1
ShadowKingStudios

Con

1. Pro has failed to show any DDO evidence that BoP is a necessary requirement in DDO debates.
--Assertions are not evidence but guesswork.

2. Notice all his examples by which BoP he feels needs to measure the validity of one's claim deal solely with intangible realities...God, afterlife, ghosts, aliens...the bullsh*t topics of debates.
--How much proof is needed to show "resolved: humans need oxygen to live." Not much, since simple common sense by default will award the affirmative party a victory for such a trivial case of elementary understanding. Therefore BoP is not necessary here to prove we need oxygen to survive, just an affirmative will suffice: What are you breathing now that is partaking in sustaining your life? The interrogative affirmative is by no means attached to one's burden. It proves little, but seems to carry a huge impact because of it's directness. One could also win this argument without BoP by simply stating "Breath in, Breath out." You naturally get the gist of what the affirmative party is declaring. No heavy argumentation or multiple diverse links of sources are needed for simple common sense to realize a BoP isn't necessary to prove this resolution. But through judging criteria that is another standard.

3. BoP defined under debate terminology is & ALWAYS should be the objectivity by which we define its use.
"Burden of Proof: A debater who offers an argument must show that it is valid in order for it to be accepted. In Lincoln-Douglas debate, the affirmative team has the burden to prove the resolution true while the negative has the burden to prove the resolution false." http://debate-central.ncpa.org...

Pro claims:
"BoP should always fall under the person making a positive claim"
"BoP is important to meet when you make a positive claim."
Well, Debate Central says both the positive & negative affirmative team need to meet BoP. Pro is either wrong, or that established debate site is wrong. Other DDO members too erroneously think BoP only applies to the Instigator.

"This debate is not a split-BOP debate. ...The fact that ...didn't make it clear which Bible should be something held against him - since he is the one WHO STARTED THE DEBATE. Not me." http://www.debate.org...

This is faulty reasoning. In this debate, Blade made this claim "I am arguing that the Bible is not absolute." In my analysis I made this clarifying revelation: "Your own words. So which Bible are you arguing is not absolute? The Catholic Bible, KJ Bible, NKJ Bible, NIV Bible, Geneva Bible, Gideon Bible, Confraternity Bible, Lexham English Bible, Amplified Bible, Bishop's Bible, Darby Bible, Coverdale Bible, or from any of the 50+ other bibles? You did not make it clear which Bible you were arguing against. " BoP if we accept the criteria of other debate sites is equally shared.

Like Pro, most DDO members think BoP means you must prove your resolution beyond a reasonable doubt, but DDO does not mandated such a criteria. Debaters likewise think it constitutes direct point penalization if one fails to meet BoP. It is idiocy to argue against no use of BoP as a criteria, but my point is "proof" isn't the necessary requirement set by DDO that constitutes how voters should judge a debate. The DDO criteria is expressly clear by which fair, impartial method you are obligated to vote by.

The 7 Point System is a perfect example.




ProTiedCon
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?




Make sure you click on the "?" button next time for further enlightenment. Not one of those guidelines stipulates in any manner as "Who upheld their burden of proof?" "Who proved their argument beyond a reasonable doubt?" If there is any one DDO guideline that is a necessary requirement in our debates it is "who made more convincing arguments?" The argument that is logically convincing is a requirement, yet DDO is clear "more" and the plural of arguments is--not should--but IS one of the necessary requirements in a DDO debate--not burden of proof, but more convincing arguments.

Let us look again to the above BoP definition at the word "valid" one can argue this word is defining "more convincing arguments" & thus DDO has established the explicit criteria of BoP. Well, in rebuttal, if this were true how come Blade of Truth never made this connection in any of his comment arguments, here:
http://www.debate.org...
Not one time did he expressly connect "BoP" to "more convincing arguments." Again if we look to DDO evidence we see in troll debates persons winning making ludicrous arguments, never proving aliens exist but rather convincing perspectives that "Morgan Freeman is God--look how old he is!" "Tilda Swinton is an asexual android." etc. One's case does not have to be thoroughly proven to win, but rather more convincing than his/her opponent.



For the sake of pun, my opponent has failed to meet his burden of providing the Best Evidence "Supporting" BoP as a Necessary Requirement in DDO debates.
I have meet my burden of providing the Best Evidence--DDO's own Judging Criteria--"Discrediting" BoP as a Necessary Requirement in DDO debates with "Who made more convincing arguments?"

My arguments are more convincing than my opponent's and that is the high point-awarded guideline (3pts.) by which DDO mandates you to issue a fair & impartial vote upon--not did such & such prove it to you beyond some reasonable doubt.
Ozzyhead

Pro

Thank you for this debate. I pass round two, as agreed upon
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by FaustianJustice 2 years ago
FaustianJustice
ShadowKingStudiosOzzyheadTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Instigator's BoP is to logically deduce or present evidence to demonstrate a resolution. Con's BoP is to point out flaws in the logic, or demonstrate enough exception that it should not be a rule. In those (professionally) described "bullsh*t" debates, the criteria (that being the hurdle of BoP) is the same, even if the subject matter is far from reasonable. (Superman vs Thor, etc). "Who upheld their burden of proof" is the 'made the convincing argument' vote, since 'proof' when dealing with Thor, Superman, Ghosts, is a nebulous concept. That is what makes a convincing argument, after all, one that reinforces the BoP, or shows it untrue. Pro IDed the the point that a a debate is pointless if there is no impetus to make your case. Con echoed that. And speaking generally, "Pro" is the instigator. "Be it resolved, Best Evidence Supporting and BoP as necessary should be discredited/abolished". Double con'ing a contention hurts my brain. Whats left of it, at least.
Vote Placed by Truth_seeker 2 years ago
Truth_seeker
ShadowKingStudiosOzzyheadTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Shadow makes a great point, burden of proof is not mandatory. You can search the FAQ and help, not once is burden of proof a requirement. The other problem is that burden of proof doesn't just lie with the instigator, but also the opponent. Con gave a great example to support his position which awards him sources. Burden of proof is out of the question unless stated otherwise.
Vote Placed by RichardCypher 2 years ago
RichardCypher
ShadowKingStudiosOzzyheadTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: I didn't expect this debate to be over so quick. And yes, Shadow did give the most convincing arguments even if he did fulfill his obligation to prove his resolution. Ozzy gave a logical argument but in the end Shadow did present the best evidence discrediting the bop as a "necessary requirement" to judge ddo debates. Ddo's own words from their 7 P-System app. The sources were reliable too because they gave me a look at how others believe the bop isn't shared when it really is.