The Instigator
Georgia
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
LR4N6FTW4EVA
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Should Shakespeare be taught in School

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/21/2008 Category: Education
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 23,943 times Debate No: 5489
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

Georgia

Pro

Shakespear should not be banned in schools as it teaches us about ENglish History, Our english culture and Shakespear even if it was a disguse made words up that today are in the english dictionary. English language was first coined by William Shakespeare which should be a good enough reason in itself.

I think it's really important, we should be learning about anything that is so well known in the world, especially Shakespeare.

I have found that all the analysing texts in English at my school are incredibly easy and the symbolism etc. is extremely obvious. Shakespeare is so much deeper, and to understand it you really have to get into the characters and think about every little thing, which is fantastic.

And in Drama, Shakespeare in drama, I it is really fun, you know the character's motivations but it discovering your character doesn't just stop there, there is so much more and so many thoughts and desires and feelings that are shown. It would be so interesting to play.

Apart from the educational things I think Shakespeare teaches us life lessons and helps us all learn the history, culture and everything about Shakespeare and our English past.
LR4N6FTW4EVA

Con

"When we renounce all learning, we have no troubles."
-Laozi, founder of Taoism

Because I agree with Laozi, I negate.

Observation 1: The Affirmative must prove that teaching Shakespeare in school leads to an actual benefit to society, as Negative I must show that teaching Shakespeare either produces no benefit, or leads to detriment.

Observation 2: Schools are an institution of learning.

The issue with teaching Shakespeare is that it encourages people to think. In fact, my opponent actually conceded this. Furthermore, Shakespeare contributes to learning. As my opponent said, he made up new words, and teaching him improves reading analysis skills. Although these seem beneficial at first, one must really look at the world. Thinking and learning are detrimental evolutionary traits. In fact, as our society learns more and thinks more, more and more people encourage the extinction of society. For example, people use learning to build factories that contribute to learning, and how do you think Hitler came up with his "Final Solution"? Hitler thought, and look what that did. Also, there are groups in society that have thought so much, they have decided that humans SHOULD go extinct.

Also, our thinking and learning has encouraged monogamy, which also is evolutionarily unsound. Polygamy is far more beneficial.

Look at ants. They don't think, they don't learn, in fact, they're so stupid, they find a pointless life fun. Humans would be far happier if we didn't think about how bad life was. If I was an ant, I would be soooooooooo happy, because hell, my life sucks, but I don't know that. I don't think. Life is a blast.

Finally, teaching Shakespeare or anything means that children have to do something besides be delinquent. Delinquency is what gives childhood value. All the adults I know remember their delinquent moments far more favorably than their good moments. Also, delinquency leads to far more success in life than learning. For example, Obama did pot as a teenager, now he's running for president. Bill Clinton did pot, and he was elected. Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard. Clearly delinquency should be encouraged.

"I think it's really important, we should be learning about anything that is so well known in the world, especially Shakespeare."

Ugh, learning. Where has that got anyone? Furthermore, learning diminishes creativity. For example, the world views of uneducated people led to amazingly creative mythologies, and complex pantheons of gods. Which would you prefer to believe, that the universe was created by an explosion of a super dense particle, or that it is actually the body of a frost giant?

"I have found that all the analysing texts in English at my school are incredibly easy and the symbolism etc. is extremely obvious. Shakespeare is so much deeper, and to understand it you really have to get into the characters and think about every little thing, which is fantastic.'

So Shakespeare is harder? That gives children lower grades. This is bad, because people with bad grades don't get into good schools, and then they get bad jobs. Teaching Shakespeare is evil and a purposeful attempt to degrade the self-esteem of children.

"And in Drama, Shakespeare in drama, I it is really fun, you know the character's motivations but it discovering your character doesn't just stop there, there is so much more and so many thoughts and desires and feelings that are shown. It would be so interesting to play."

You know what's more fun? Delinquency.

"Apart from the educational things I think Shakespeare teaches us life lessons and helps us all learn the history, culture and everything about Shakespeare and our English past."

More learning. As I said, learning is bad.
Debate Round No. 1
Georgia

Pro

You point out School is not for learning.... I Strongly disagree as school is an Educational place and put here in society so that we learn otherwise why wouldn't they let us stay at home all the time.... Also Teaching Shakespeare is not at all hard it is more the way you go around it and many teachers teach it in a good way that actually at the end of our year 9 tests everyone got very high...

You can learn and be creative at the same time creativity isn't always drawing its thinking what if Romeo didn't fall in love ? What if... that is creativity too.

Learning has got us where we are today where would we be if the Internet/ computers etc etc where not built this was due to learning and how about books and other things. Einstein wouldn't be where he was if he was not educated neither would these people and without education you can not earn money or get a good job if you have no qualifications then your nothing in life.

Why should we stop teaching Shakespeare? IT is a key historical past and that we should never forget and he has been one of the greatest writers in history to date.
LR4N6FTW4EVA

Con

"You point out School is not for learning.... I Strongly disagree as school is an Educational place and put here in society so that we learn otherwise why wouldn't they let us stay at home all the time.... Also Teaching Shakespeare is not at all hard it is more the way you go around it and many teachers teach it in a good way that actually at the end of our year 9 tests everyone got very high..."

First, I never said that schools weren't for learning, I just said learning was bad. Also "at the end of our year 9 tests everyone got very high..." see, delinquency is fun.

"You can learn and be creative at the same time creativity isn't always drawing its thinking what if Romeo didn't fall in love ? What if... that is creativity too."

Objection, relevance?

"Learning has got us where we are today where would we be if the Internet/ computers etc etc where not built this was due to learning and how about books and other things. Einstein wouldn't be where he was if he was not educated neither would these people and without education you can not earn money or get a good job if you have no qualifications then your nothing in life."

Education makes us think. We should be dumb, we'd be happier. Also, if education is so nice, why did Bill Gates drop out of Harvard?

"Why should we stop teaching Shakespeare? IT is a key historical past and that we should never forget and he has been one of the greatest writers in history to date."

He made us think. Thinking is bad.
Debate Round No. 2
Georgia

Pro

Being dumb does not make us a happier person because if you were dumb = no qualifications = no job = bad financial ststus

WIthout our education we would be no where the pc wouldnt be invented we would be living with no house as to build a house you need to be qualified etc etc.

To the point of shakespeare he makes us think we all need to think even if it is with the casul things like should i eat now or later .... that is THINKING! every thing we do is thinking we do not do anything without thinking.

Moreover Shakespeare trains that part of us to think to learn and to be educated.
LR4N6FTW4EVA

Con

"Being dumb does not make us a happier person because if you were dumb = no qualifications = no job = bad financial ststus"

Yeah, but you'd be too dumb to realize your life sucks.

"WIthout our education we would be no where the pc wouldnt be invented we would be living with no house as to build a house you need to be qualified etc etc."

Ignorance is bliss. What can I say?

"To the point of shakespeare he makes us think we all need to think even if it is with the casul things like should i eat now or later .... that is THINKING! every thing we do is thinking we do not do anything without thinking."

If you just don't think, instinct will take over, and you'll be fine.

"Moreover Shakespeare trains that part of us to think to learn and to be educated."

Or we could succumb to the id, let instant gratification rule our lives.
Debate Round No. 3
Georgia

Pro

Georgia forfeited this round.
LR4N6FTW4EVA

Con

My opponent forfeited. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by LR4N6FTW4EVA 9 years ago
LR4N6FTW4EVA
Yeah.
Posted by Sweatingjojo 9 years ago
Sweatingjojo
ftw.
No votes have been placed for this debate.