Is that necessary for school to introduce subject that are purely abstract and theoretical?
Debate Rounds (3)
First, that the theoretical subjects are not mandatory does not necessarily mean that they are not important(at least provide some evidences to further explain why they are replaceable)
Second, most of the skills that those subjects help to develop are transferable.For instance, if you are majoring in physics or math purely for doing scientific research ,learning philosophy can help to develop a sense of ideology that make you think more deeply and put them into a big picture beyond just applying mathematical formula to calculation.In addition,literature or linguistics are quite necessary since we manage to use language , which is one of the major differences between human and animal ,not only for communication but also for preservation of our civilization. We have develop a system where we have archived the achievements and collective wisdom of generations.
Well, maybe you should have looked up the dictionary first before you put the statement, the adjectives mandatory and compulsory are not really equivalent to necessary.First of all, necessary means something that is necessary is needed in order for something else to happen.However, compulsory refers to something which you must do it or accept it, because it is the law or because someone in a position of authority says you must.
There is no doubt that those kind of purely theoretical subjects are mandatory to be taken by students if they are just required to develop a practical skill for their further career.However, from a wider or long term perspective,which might be at the educational level,those so called theoretical subjects really lay a foundation of others,which cannot be substituted.
Debate_King1475 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by BLAHthedebator 1 year 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:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited, leaving his arguments refuted and Pro's arguments up refuted. Pro destroyed cons arguments with semantics, and con just kinda went off topic.
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.