The education system in Singapore produces more scholars than thinkers?
Debate Rounds (3)
I will define what scholars and thinkers are.
Thinkers can be defined in two different ways in accord with the free dictionary.
1. One who devotes much time to thought or meditation. 
2.One who thinks or reasons in a certain way 
Whereas, scholars can also be classified into two ways as well.
1. A learned person. 
2. A specialist in a given branch of knowledge 
The Singapore Education system is mainly based on the meritocracy. Students are admitted to the course in their favour regardless of their race, religion or even language.
Burden of proof.
As the title which is shown above, Pro shall have the burden of proof to establish 'The education system in Singapore produces more scholars than thinkers'.
I won't proceed until my opponent kindly present his arguments.
My opponents arguments:
Premise 1: Meritocracy produces more scholars thank thinkers.
Premise 2: Singapore is practicing meritocracy.
Conclusion: Due to The education system in Singapore, there are more scholars than thinkers.
So, I will take my case to rebut his arguments.
In premise 1, there are more scholars than thinkers in Singapore because of XYZ.
Therefore, I assume that Singapore will have less scholars than thinkers without XYZ.
So, what are you trying to say is that XYZ is so-called the factor that forbids some scholars to become thinkers.
For me, your argument is invalid at all. This is because your premise 1 is invalid. Thus, the following will never occur.
In education system, there is something which you all call it as 'Higher Order Thinking Skills'. 
This forces or requires more students to think outside the box. What you have learnt ought to be mastered , understand and being applied in every day's life.
Before any questions are answered, we must think first, then analyse and so on.
Without thinking, I firmly believe that you can't answer those difficult questions.
Conclusion : My opponent's arguments fail utterly, please defend your argument.
My argument formalized:
Premise 1: All students are taught critical thinking skills since they are at school. 
Premise 2: Scholars are at school.
Conclusion: Scholars are taught critical thinking skills.
Premise 3: Thinkers are having critical thinking skills.
Conclusion: Scholars are thinkers.
ArieMangat forfeited this round.
Let's make all these things easy.
Pro is saying that 'Singapore's meritocracy educational system produces more scholars than thinkers'.
I won't get into my brand new arguments unless my opponent rebutted or provide his standpoints.
Some hints to my opponent:
1)You shall provide the difference in characteristics between scholars and thinkers.
You shall be stating why scholars and thinkers aren't the same.
2)The education system has caused the scholars not to think.
You must say what are the side effects of meritocracy's system to the students.
For example, the don't think much because of...
3)Why thinkers can't do well in the education system in Singapore.
Provide a myriad of reasons and even consequences.
I rest my case in this round.
Over to Pro.
I urge you to vote Con.
and a script about your con statement.
Tweka forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Defro 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||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Con actually provided arguments. Pro also loses points in conduct for not debating.
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.