The Instigator
brian_eggleston
Pro (for)
Winning
52 Points
The Contender
Alk09
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

Social deference is an anachronism that should be actively discouraged

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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: 10/1/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,796 times Debate No: 9585
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (9)

 

brian_eggleston

Pro

First of all, here's my inspiration for this debate:

I am writing this from one of my local bar / restaurants where a fellow customer - an older gentleman who I know only to say "hello" to, greeted me and addressed me as "Sir" as I walked in. This was just seconds after I had given directions to a stranger, who was, again, older than me, who also addressed me as "Sir".

Just to let you know, due to a scandalous oversight in this year's Queen's Honours List, my considerable contributions to British society have yet again failed to be formally recognised and, as a result, I am still waiting for the knighthood I so richly deserve! Until this outrageous injustice has been resolved, there is, therefore, no reason to address me as "Sir" – plain "Mister" will do just fine.

The fact is, British people have the concept of social deference installed in them at an early age. So, because I am usually quite smartly-dressed and well-spoken, I am called "Sir", which I am very uncomfortable with as I consider myself working class (even if nobody else does) and also because I refuse to address anybody, except the ennobled or officially titled people as "Sir" or "Madam", and even then I do so reluctantly.

It is similar in America, even more prolific, especially in hotels and restaurants, though the distinction between the social classes there is much more blurred and a big difference is that the staff only call customers "Sir" and "Madam" because it is part of their job description.

In conclusion, I affirm that we should actively discourage the forelock-tugging, class-ridden practice of calling fellow members of society "Sir" and "Madam" and stick to "Mister" and "Missus" in a similar way to the way French people refer to strangers as "Monsieur" and "Madame" or "Mademoiselle".

Thank you.
Alk09

Con

No I think your wrong Maddam
because ummmm..................
well......................................
soooooooahh wait no maybe yes um well No no YES no............
OH YA wait no ok no wait umm.............
ok um no wait stop well what was I what?.....
ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmah
mummmmmmmmmmmmm
gummmmmmmmmmmmm
blummmmmmmmmmm
dummmmmmmmmm
NONONONo wait .........
wait wait stop I remember it was because
no um yes um no maybe wait well no maybe yes but what?
well ummmmmm maybe wait no wait yes
NONONONONONONO!!!!!!!!!!
ok i remember the reason why we need to classify people by their
social/economic/pesimistic ideopeopleologies
is because
ummmmmmmmm............
well
wait nope...........
wait wait!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
brian_eggleston

Pro

With many thanks to Alk09 for his contribution, I remember when I had my first drink but despite all the years of practice I have had since than, I am yet to master Drunkenese, as a consequence of which I have no idea what my opponent was banging on about!

In view of this I shall reiterate my point that to address your fellow citizens as "Sir" or "Madam" harks back to the days of feudalism when the ‘lower classes' were expected to know there place in society and address their ‘superiors' accordingly.

In the modern world, this verbal division of the classes should now be considered and anachronism and such social deference should, therefore, actively be discouraged.

Thank you.
Alk09

Con

With many thanks to brian_eggleston for his contribution, I remember when I had my first drink but despite all the years of practice I have had since than, I am yet to master Drunkenese, as a consequence of which I have no idea what my opponent was banging on about!

In view of this I shall reiterate my point that to address your fellow citizens as "Sir" or "Madam" harks back to the days of feudalism when the ‘lower classes' were expected to know there place in society and address their ‘superiors' accordingly.

In the modern world, this verbal division of the classes should now be considered and anachronism and such social deference should, therefore, actively be discouraged.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by ToastOfDestiny 7 years ago
ToastOfDestiny
Ditto to what britt said. Another problem is that many users create multiple accounts and could use them to mess with the system. Your idea is definitely a good starting point though.

Welcome to DDO!
Posted by brittwaller 7 years ago
brittwaller
@Nimtike:

Get used to it. If you are a moron (I am not saying that *you* are, I am only replying to your comment:) then you will be called out. Same for idiots, etc. The bar isn't that high here, but we do have a bar.

As for your idea: right and good, but will NEVER happen. Spend some time here, you will understand.

And welcome to the site.

Peace
Britt
Posted by Nimtike 7 years ago
Nimtike
For example, I have joined just today. It really is sad that in cases like this, both new and younger users may begin to be characterized as being incompetent and, as RoyLatham loosely stated,
"moron[s]".
Since I am just learning the ins and outs of the website, I really don't know where to put this, so why not where I first though of it.
My idea to pre-qualify debaters. If a "starter" debate were set up where the first position is posed. The new guy must then refute the first point and give support to the opposition. If each entry is recorded individually and only "passed and proved" members were to be able to see them, they could theoretically grade their rebuttal and give a qualification to the new user, thereby to be a qualifying variable in future debates.
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
I am beginning to appreciate the argument for pre-qualifying Contenders, pending the development of a reliable moron repellent. It's a shame, because it may become difficult for legitimate new debaters to participate.
Posted by rawrxqueen 7 years ago
rawrxqueen
Wow. Sweetie, are you confused? This is debate.org, not myspace. Generally, most people who have an account on here actually have an IQ higher then a pumpkin, and grow up to be much more then a person selling newspapers on the side of the road. Seriously, don't waste peoples time.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
CONDUCT and ARGUMENTS and SOURCES and GRAMMAR - PRO, all for obvious reasons.
Posted by brittwaller 7 years ago
brittwaller
So obviously there is no middle ground between "retarded" and "equal or better" when posting criteria for challengers to accept debates.

Really it would be a little humourous if "retarded" were a criteria option...
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
"The voting period will last indefinitely."

Darn, again.

I'm glad I'm aloud to accept it now, though.
Posted by feverish 7 years ago
feverish
Good manners never cost nobody nothin'.

Nor good grammar neither.

Still, thought provoking neo-PC socio-postmodernist rational Brian. Nice.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by ToastOfDestiny 7 years ago
ToastOfDestiny
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by rawrxqueen 7 years ago
rawrxqueen
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by dogparktom 7 years ago
dogparktom
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by brittwaller 7 years ago
brittwaller
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by LB628 7 years ago
LB628
brian_egglestonAlk09Tied
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