US Schools don't teach students important information
Our current American schools teach students very important information. My opponent agrees that math, english, and science are important. So, my only job here is to prove the importance of history.
BoP is shared.
Argument 1 - Many Job Opportunities With History
History is a basic component of many jobs. Learning history to an advanced level will provide you with many job opportunities.
"Among the jobs you can consider are: advertising executive, analyst, archivist, broadcaster, campaign worker, consultant, congressional aide, editor, foreign service officer, foundation staffer, information specialist, intelligence agent, journalist, legal assistant, lobbyist, personnel manager, public relations staffer, researcher, teacher . . . the list can be almost endless.
More specifically, though, with your degree in history you can be an educator, researcher, communicator or editor, information manager, advocate, or even a businessperson."
Some students become interested in history. If they continue to learn history in college, they can take a part in one of the history-related jobs aforementioned. Not only will they have something they can make money off, but they'll enjoy it as well.
Argument 2 - Learning from Previous Cultural Mistakes
"It's important because if it isn't studied, how can we learn from our mistakes? And it can also give answers to some very basic questions, for example: Why did some cultures become much more advanced several hundreds or thousands year before others? Why are some countries much richer than others today? But by studying history you will also learn source criticism which is very important nowadays when it is very easy to find and create information."
Without history classes amongst our schools, the number of historical researchers will diminish, slowing down the growth of our technology. It may even go as far as stopping the growth of our technology.
I've got more to offer in my favor. But I'll leave it at that. I am eager to read my opponent's response.
This wasn't how I was hoping the debate would go out.
As far as employment goes...
In the near future jobs in tech related fields are going to boom while history jobs are going dry.
This shows where the jobs will be in 2020 and many other websites show the same statistics
Learning from the past won't be needed
History is not going to repeat itself in our ever changing world. Situations and conflicts from the past don't have an influence in the modern world. When it comes to war, we try to make the best decision, but we will still think the old right is right today. Someone disagrees with every decision made. Considering that the future warfare will be cyber, many of this "history" won't be needed anyway.
R1. As far as employment goes...
The source of your argument, http://money.usnews.com..., only predicts which jobs will be receiving the most employees. Game development wasn't in any of the lists, yet it doesn't look like it's going dry.
"Historians generally receive a Master's degree before they enter the job market. Once employed, Historians can expect to earn an average of $56,000 per year throughout their career.
In addition, over the coming 10 years Historians will see fairly rapid growth within their industry. They should experience a 7.8% rate of growth during this time period."
I say history is not going dry, and I've got sources to back it up.
R2. Learning from the past won't be needed
"History is not going to repeat itself in our ever changing world. Situations and conflicts from the past don't have an influence in the modern world."
It's not the influence of historical mistakes that we should worry about; It's making them again.
"The Titanic was known as the unsinkable ship, specifically designed to make the long journey to America with no possible chance of sinking.
But one night, the ship crew ignored warnings of icebergs in their path and went onward. The ship hit an iceberg and scraped the entire right side, causing the boat to sink and killed 1,517 people."
I don't really have anything to say. I agree with your points and my last post was irrelevant. Good game
All formalities aside, maybe my opponent conceded and therefore lost the debate, but it's very hard to find someone that's willing to do that. I may be at right to receive argument points, but he's at right to receive conduct points. I give props to my opponent.
I wish my opponent good luck for his future debates!
|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||3|