The Instigator
SandlasJuagas
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
Lacan
Con (against)
Winning
47 Points

Disregarding correct spelling and grammar while typing on a computer is a bad habit.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/16/2007 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,086 times Debate No: 551
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (17)

 

SandlasJuagas

Pro

I'm going to make this a simple opening statement. It simply ticks me off when people do not use correct grammar or spelling when writing messages on the computer. I can stand the smiley faces or whatever, but I just don't see any reason to not use correct spelling and grammar. It just makes me feel like the person talking to me doesn't give a crap enough to add that extra period. I mean, is it really that hard to look and see that "tahnks" should really be spelled "thanks"? People should just slow down enough so as to communicate with the slightest amount of sophistication.
Lacan

Con

Grammar is fascist and authoritarian. In the case of life in general being a "grammar nazi" is more then just a term, it's a truth. Grammar is something one leans through rather complex education in a difficult language and many of the rules are very arbitrary and difficult to understand. What this means is simply that few retain what they have learned about complex grammar notions as soon as they no longer need to know them for school. In a world of vast inequality, the internet is becoming the great equalizer. It's a place were anyone from blue color workers to CEOs can have discussions on an equal plane, and all can have their views listened to no matter their place in life. Holding everyone to grammar standards perpetuates class difference in that those who enjoy the pleasure of having a job that requires them to write formalized documents rather then doing something less intellectually stimulating will gain the advantage, even in the equalizing plane of the internet.
Read Marcuse.
Debate Round No. 1
SandlasJuagas

Pro

Touch´┐Ż Lacan.

I can see your point, and I agree that it is unfair to set standards for a worldwide venue like the internet. But, and I should have made this more clear, my subject matter is people who I have met in real life and who I know are fully capable of using correct grammar and spelling. It is these people that make me angry. The people who have gotten an education and know how to correctly communicate with another human in a way that doesn't insert the word "like" into every third spacing are the ones who should be thinking of their disregard for grammar as a bad habit.

I absolutely respect your rebuttal, for I have never thought of grammar in a way as the one you put it. I will definitely read Marcuse.
Lacan

Con

There is no doubt that your argument makes is a lot more logical in context, and holding people to basic grammar and spelling is less fascist then the semicolons that Marcuse critiques.

I'll make a personal point as well. I go to a good high school, and am overall a very good english student, I am also somewhat well read. Despite this, I have to use a spell check on every sentence I type, due to a learning disability, I virtually can not spell. What this means is your act of holding people to even basic spelling online turns a basic activity like AIM into a production for a large potion of people for whom spelling is next to impossible. For something like this, a formal debate, I have no issue correcting and even looking up words on google before submitting arguments, but in a more relaxed context such as talking to friends I often write things phonetically. Making grammar a standard by which to evaluate people is not accurate and limits those trying to make their ideas known.

Also, there is no impact to your argument in the end. Even a risk of limiting peoples ability to communicate will outweigh the annoyance you feel when you see the english language butchered. When you see the word "like" spelled "lyke" it may piss you off, but I have no doubt you know what it means. Your gripe ends up being a pet peeve and little more. Even if the person in question is trying to type faster rather then carefully in a world where you can still understand him/her the increased speed will, in the end be the bigger impact. There is more to gain from conveying messages more quickly then is lost when one is pissed off by misspellings.

Also holding people to any level of grammar legitimizes the true grammar nazis who impose those things that I have defined as fascist. You concede, or rather agree that holding people to these standards is bad, and even that it is better to allow poor grammar. In a world where the extreme levels of grammar are bad, then it is best to strike against grammar in general by allowing internet vernacular rather then criticizing it.

In a world where grammar is bad, internet vernacular is the radical action against grammar. This is the Zizekian (or Lacanian) concept of striking against oneself and in thus breaking down the hegemonic ideological ordinates. This is Zizek in 2000. (I forgot which article it is, I'll find it if need be, but its not in the specific context of grammar.)
Debate Round No. 2
SandlasJuagas

Pro

You have truthfully changed my mind about my pet peeve; for pet peeve is what it is. I now see the other perspective and will no longer debate the subject.

Thank you for the enlightening discussion.
Lacan

Con

Thanks for having an open mind, something many seem to lack in the present day. It's been a good a good discussion.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
Lacan I am following your debates, and I admire you though I don't agree with everything you say. Though I don't think a topic like this is debatable- the term "bad" is based on opinion, too open to individual interpretation, and therfore not absolute- but to be articulate even with grammatical and spelling errors just left your opponent in this debate with absolutely no response. Good job.
Posted by Masterworks 9 years ago
Masterworks
Wonderful debate.
I honestly didn't expect such a good defense for the con.
But, based on personal preference and professionalism, I'm going to have to sway the other way.
Posted by Scyrone 9 years ago
Scyrone
Uhhhh . . . that was weird. I saw defenses against Con:

1. "a basic activity like AIM into a production for a large potion of people for whom spelling is next to impossible". But on AIM you talk to your friends, "in a more relaxed context such as talking to friends I often write things phonetically".

2. Why do people care if someone uses bad puncuation and grammar? Because when you get older, and you want to get a job, no matter where you go, by typing in or writing in 'lyke I wan' dis job Bcus it kan help mE wit my lernin skilz dats wat i want :D' you will get rejected. Professionalism is needed throughout life because we are people who hold ourselves to a higher standard. By writing like we are five we degrade ourselves and the individual self. We make matters worse for ourselves by 'riting lyk dis'. If I wrote like this instead: "Greetings sir, I would like this job because I am good at computers and I can type well" I would most likly get the job in terms of typing and writing. Therefore, it is necessary that we keep our on a human level and not de-evolve our education.
Posted by ruth421963 9 years ago
ruth421963
I was for both. I'm amazed one of
you came in and looked at it with a new
light. I have loved{refreshing}
grammer{although it would be hard to
prove that now}.
I prefer to get my feelings out
here{fast, I don't like typos however
I don't care to fix them}. I refuse
to sink as low as the kids today, when
I realize what I'm saying isn't correct
I will try and fix it.
Hey thanks to both of you..
nice job.!
Hope, Peace & Happiness,
Ruth
Posted by Mdal 9 years ago
Mdal
Lacan...this was a masterful debate.
well done sir, and well done SandlasJuaga for having the openness to admit that Lacan actually changed your mind. (he changed my mind as well)
so well done all around, and I am gonna vote for Lacan on this one (probably like everyone else who reads this debate)
I look forward to more debates from both of you.
-Mdal
Posted by zarul 9 years ago
zarul
Lacan, verbal raping is not appropriate! Good policy-esque debating though.
Posted by Fenrir 9 years ago
Fenrir
As a complete grammar nazi myself, I'm interested to see how this argument goes.
17 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Mharman 1 day ago
Mharman
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: In an ironic twist, con had better S&G. The hypocrisy of pro made con's argument superior.
Vote Placed by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by oboeman 9 years ago
oboeman
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by or8560 9 years ago
or8560
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by zuc704 9 years ago
zuc704
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by kylevd 9 years ago
kylevd
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Masterworks 9 years ago
Masterworks
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by ruth421963 9 years ago
ruth421963
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by ghatem 9 years ago
ghatem
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Mdal 9 years ago
Mdal
SandlasJuagasLacanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03