The Instigator
BangBang-Coconut
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
joshuaXlawyer
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

LD is better than PFD

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 2 votes the winner is...
BangBang-Coconut
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/14/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,511 times Debate No: 15295
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

BangBang-Coconut

Con

On my last debate regarding which was a better form of debate, Policy or Public Forum joshuaXlawyer commented saying he hated them both and prefered LD. As I did LD in high school (and can feel a similar sentiment) I though this would be a fun debate.

Round 1 is for greeting and acceptance/declines rounds 2-4 are for the debate portion.

Again, like I said I actually did LD, so my opponent if he so desires could even structure his arguments in an LD style, complete with Value, Criteria and Contentions. (just a thought any way) :P

Rules-
-All arguments, attacks, and rebuttles must be structured.
-No hate speech, if you have a qualm there must be reason behind it.
-No foul language, let's keep it clean.

Other than that let's have some fun!
joshuaXlawyer

Pro

I agree and await your case.
Debate Round No. 1
BangBang-Coconut

Con

I thank my opponent for graciously accepting this debate!

So to start out, let's begin with some frame-work and definitions;

Observation 1: As the instigator of this debate, I have the burden to prove that LD is not better than PFD. If I am unable to do so, then I lose this debate.

Observation 2: The con also has a burden; to prove LD is better than PFD. If my opponent is unable to prove that LD is better than PFD and I am able to prove it is not, he will lose this debate

Observation 3: The Con has the power of fiat, if neither side proves their point, and the debate comes down to being a tie, the Con will be the winner.

Definitions:
LD- Lincoln Douglas debate, a form of High School debate based on value issues
PFD- Public Forum Debate, a form of High School, and Junior High debate created so that the general public can debate, watch, or judge a round.
Better- Superior, or preferable

Also before begin, I ask that all voters please be Tabula Rasa in your decisions. If there are any biased votes (say some-on did PFD or LD in high school) there will have been no purpose to this debate.

So now to the contentionary portion of the debate;

Contention 1: Choice of preferred debate style is entirely opinionated-

[1]Parliamentary, Mace, Jes, IPDA, Policy, Classic, and Extemporaneous Debate are just a few enumerations of the various styles of debate that exist along with LD and PFD. Now in various areas of the world, different styles of the same activity (debate) exist for a reason. There are many different preferences of things to debate.

A Person may enjoy Debating issues of Policy, CX debate is for them. If a person enjoys debating Value based issues than LD debate is for them. If a person enjoys debating socially conscious topics, with a mixture of Policy and Value, PFD is for them.

No one can truly say that one style of debate is ever better than the other, because it is entirely up to an opinion as to which is best.

Contention 2: PFD gives debaters the opportunity to debate many more topics than LD permits-

[2] According to the National Forensics League website (The largest organized debate league in the United States) The LD topic only changes every two months, whereas The PFD topic changes every single month! That means if you compared an LD debater doing LD for their entire four years in High School versus a PFD debate team doing PFD for their entire four years of high school, the two kids who did PFD would get to debate twice as much as the one kid doing LD.

But not only that, PFD topics are usually political in nature, and deal with current events. through PFD students learn more about the world around them. LD only affords the opportunity for students to expand their own thought process in moral, ethical, and social topic. Now not to say that that's a bad thing by far, I only want to point out that PFD offers this benefit that LD does not.

Contention 3: PFD debate teaches kids teamwork-

[3] PFD is a team style debate, which utilizes two debater working together. Whereas LD is a singular form of debate. Now I am not saying that debating by oneself is bad a all (that would be ridiculous since I'm doing that right now) What I'm saying, is that though PFD Debate, one acquires the ability to work with others; and listen to their ideas along with their own. LD debate does not allow this opurtunity.

Closing thoughts-

Now these are only my constructive arguments, so of course I'm not going to load every-thing on my opponent at once; but through these contentions, observations, and definitions we can see that LD and PFD are two forms of the same thing- Debate. And while one style may appeal to some, one will also appeal to others. It is an utter fallacy to ever say that one is better than the other.

For all of these reasons I urge you, please; Vote Con in this debate.
Thank you, and I now hand the debate back over to my opponent. :3

Sources-
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2]http://www.nflonline.org...
[3]http://www.nflonline.org...
joshuaXlawyer

Pro

My opponents case:

Contention 1: Choice of preferred debate style is entirely opinionated

I agree how ever i would like to say LD debate is a more likable style of debate and is more opinionated to the majority.
Meaning the majority would prefer LD.

Contention 2: PFD gives debaters the opportunity to debate many more topics than LD permits-

This might be the case however not nesscarily needed to be better more topics may just mean writing more cases and less arguing of a single topic. LD actually gives people time to argue a case and improve it, and improve and further their knowledge and experience in one topic. Which can be helpful knowledge to have in the future.

Also he/she says that LD topics are not political? the newest topic is : Is the united states justified in using private military firms to pursue military objectives. Hows thay not political and don't make me mention the nuclear weapons cases. The jury nullification topic? and the topic about should Juviniles be treated as adults in violent crimes? Yes your right nothing political about that.

Contention 3: PFD debate teaches kids teamwork-

Do you not have a debate team? When you debate LD you work to gather on facts, cases, attacks, defenses, and etc.
Just because your debating by yourself doesn't mean you don't work as a team, you share information like values,
criterions, information about the topic, Either way we see it there is team work.

Closing thoughts-
My opponent says that they are the same and saying one is better than the other is a fallacy well in his observation it says if neither proves one is better than the other then i must win well he/she is saying they are neither better nor worse than the other therefore with his observation i would win this case because if neither is better than the other neither of our cases would win resulting in a tie and allow me to be the winner.
The funny thing is i don't think he noticed that but whatever for his/her sake i will throw in my own points as to why i should win and LD is better.

My Case:

Contention 1- Value debate teaches you to argue over the philosophy and ethics rather than all evidence like policy.

I have posted political topics from past LD topics as well i would say it is a better debate for as it allows values, like morality or utility and even pragmatism as a value and this holds up your cases and reasons why you should win and what should be upheld other than your opponents. Its not about arguing facts or evidence its about arguing which value is better to uphold.

contention 2 - LD teaches Philosophy

Such as Utilitarianism, or Hobbes and Locke and more you actually learn intelligent thinking like these and more.
This type of debate actually takes great intellect to argue, that would also be the reason why not just anyone can judge it.

Contention 3 - LD debate also has a historical pressence to the U.S

The Lincoln-Douglas Debate format is named for the 1858 Lincoln-Douglas Debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas, because their debates focused on slavery and the morals, values, and logic behind it.
This makes it a great historical debate form that has a great past of debaters even Abraham Lincoln which was one of the U.S greatest presidents.
Debate Round No. 2
BangBang-Coconut

Con

I thank my opponent for his rebuttals! (and for his clarification, I am a male)

So for maximum clarity and convenience, I will follow the same structure My opponent has taken, going Con then Pro. And with however many characters I have left, I will be summarizing the debate thus far.

Con-
So first of all before I get into the contentions, I would like to point out that my opponent does not attack my observations, and therefore concedes them to be true. We have also thankfully agreed on the definitions that I have provided. So semantic arguments will not be a problem in this debate as we have these consensual definitions.

Contention 1: Choice of debate style is entirely opinionated-

My opponent actually concedes this point at first, but then makes the claim that LD is a more likable style of debate and thus more people would prefer it. However let's look at a couple of points on this attack for a moment.
First, this attack is entirely contradictory with their prior statement in which they concede that debate style is entirely opinionated. Second, my opponent's claims regarding LD being more enjoyable, and of the majority preferring LD are statements of fact, meaning the must warrant this claim with some kind of empirical evidence for us to be able to accept this claim.

Contention 2: PFD gives debaters the opportunity to debate many more topics than LD permits-

First of all my opponent concedes to the base idea here, but says that more topics is not necessarily a good thing. He says that since LD debaters get more time to debate a topic, they learn it much better then PFD debaters learn the PFD topic. Now to this we see the Con is still winning on this point, as one style of debate has a benefit the other does not; and vice versa. This means they should be valued at the same level here, and points out that LD is not better than PFD.

Second, My opponent asks that question of how I can say that LD topics are not political, but then shortly after concedes that I'm right there's nothing political about them. So vote for me here...
... But all joking aside here, the point is that while these topics may sound political in nature, the is far from that, but that in an LD debate round you do not debate the political aspect of these topics, but the Values aspect of them. Meaning that while PFD you get to debate topics political in nature like The United States federal government should permit the use of financial incentives to encourage organ donation, or North Korea poses a more serious threat to United States national security than Iran the topic you debate in LD are over the value aspect.

Contention 3: PFD teaches kids teamwork-

First of all my opponent is misconstruing the intent of my attack here, when I say teamwork it is incredibly obvious by the text supporting this contention what I mean here. Where as my opponent defaults to referring to the debate squad as a whole. In my prior speech I talk about how in PFD you work together to build the arguments that you would run together as a team and thus build teamwork.
Second, the opening thoughts to this attack make the assumption that the school I went to had some huge debate program, when in all actuality our squad consisted of three people. Myself as the only LD debater, and a CX team; The CX team worked together all the time, and knew how to argue as a Team whereas LD did not teach me that skill.

therefore the type of team work my opponent is advocating is inherent and will exist either way.

Closing thoughts-
My opponent makes a fallacious statement. Trough my observations, I point out that my burden is not prove PFD above LD, but simply to prove that LD is not better than PFD. While on the inverse it is my opponent's job to prove that LD is better that PFD. The basis of his argument here is founded on a fallacy he interprets, therefore this goes not attacked.

Now with the Con stance defended I will not move onto my opponent's argumentation

Contention 1- Value debate teaches you to argue over the philosophy and ethics rather than all evidence like policy.

First, off this has no negative impacts for me as the realm of this debate is concerning PFD not Policy

Second, LD is limited in that regard because you cannot actually argue evidence like in PFD; you can only use is as a tool to strengthen the claim on a Contention.

Third, since PFD debate is actually designed to be a mesh between Policy and LD there exists abundantly that philosophical, and ethical nature my opponent claims does not exist in PFD

Finally, My opponent never warrants why arguing over facts and evidence is a bad thing; therefore we actually see this on the inverse as saying LD is less because it does not have this arguing over facts and evidence

Contention 2- LD teaches Philosophy

First off, I want to extend my prior point that PFD was created to be a mesh between LD an CX, therefore not only can you can still learn this philosophy; but you learn it in such a way as so you can explain it to other people in plain English. You don't have to worry about all of the jargon that encompasses using this Philosophy in an LD debate

Second, while I agree that knowing, and being able to argue philosophy is a very good thing, LD is limited in that you must argue only logic and philosophy. Even if one wanted to bring an empirical evidence based argument into a round, they would be unable to if it did not have a link to the cases value premise.

Third, My opponent does not warrant why debating a style of debate that encompasses so much jargon and philosophical philanthropy is a good thing. When you're out of high school and you plan on doing something normal with your life, being able to talk, explain something, or convince some-one of something in every-day plain English is a far more beneficial skill than being able to discuss philosophy in a barely understandable jargon that's legitimate within only a small group

Contention 3-LD debate also has a historical presence to the U.S

First, History is created every single day. We an look back to y2k and we see that's closer to us than Thomas Jefferson. Yet is is still considered history.

Second, The real impact claim here for my opponent is that LD debate maintains certain cultural aspects of american history (which really isn't true as what LD currently is has very little to with he Lincoln-Douglas debates.

Third, since we now see that the real impact of this contention is on Cultural aspects, PFD more astutely hold true to the United States culture in this modern day because of how it was formed, the debate style's execution, and the subject matter in which you debate.

And so again to my closing arguments. First off I extend my previous closing arguments as they are still applicable since my opponent never refuted them. LD and PFD are still two flavors of the same thing. Debate. therefore it is still an utter fallacy to say one is better than the other. But now I will extend this to point out that all points on the Con side are still standing, whereas no point on the Pro side has been upheld

I thank you all and again ask for a Con ballot.
I hand the debate back over to my very capable opponent.
joshuaXlawyer

Pro

joshuaXlawyer forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
BangBang-Coconut

Con

Sadly it would appear my opponent has forfieted.
Extend all prior attacks and defenses.
Cote Con :D
joshuaXlawyer

Pro

joshuaXlawyer forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 6 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
That's because your messages are closed. it says "joshuaxlawyer is not accpeting messages at this time"
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 6 years ago
joshuaXlawyer
um i dont see a message
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 6 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
Josh! Can you open up your messages?
I have an LD case written for the current UIL topic (it's a Texas circuit) and I wanted you to read over it and give me your thoughts.
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 6 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
Whew! that took a while to type @-@
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 6 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
@CiRrK

Ha ha, aw come on, it might not be as inept as CX; but you have to admit it can fun.
Posted by CiRrK 6 years ago
CiRrK
omg orange your killing me. Stop defending the least intelligent form of debate :P
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 6 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
Lol it's understandable :3
Done and done~
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 6 years ago
joshuaXlawyer
hey iv been busy post it again and i will do it.
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 6 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
Yay :D
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
BangBang-CoconutjoshuaXlawyerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited, leaving Con unanswered. Lots of S
Vote Placed by Zealous1 6 years ago
Zealous1
BangBang-CoconutjoshuaXlawyerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.