Geometry Proofs are pointless.
Debate Rounds (3)
R1) Common Sense
For this to be valid, I want to see proof of this. Give me an example of the proof measuring the length of an apothem of a regular polygon. This proof must not use any mathematical vocab, as well as no equations or mathematical equations. If not possible, proofs have a point.
That's really the only rebuttal I need.
P1) Discovering Mathematical Truth
Proofs are needed to demonstrate the truths and falsities of geometry . Without them, we would not be able to do much more difficult math problems.
Simply put, there are some proofs that are easy and could possible be proven with common sense. But there are others that are more difficult and that are necessary to higher level mathematics.
Looking forward to my opponent's response. Hopefully this doesn't end in FF.
 - http://investigations.terc.edu...
My College Class
Had the resolution been "Geometry Proofs are Boring" or "Geometry Proofs could be taught in half the Time" or something like that, Pro's arguments would be valid. But as far as geometric proofs having a purpose, or having a point, it is to show geometric falsities. Arguing that it took too much time has no relevance to this debate.
Back to Pro.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by mdc32 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro pretty much conceded.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.