The Instigator
afterbirth
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
Complicated_Mind
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

quickfire debate: Opponent chooses topic

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 4 votes the winner is...
Complicated_Mind
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2015 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,221 times Debate No: 68532
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (71)
Votes (4)

 

afterbirth

Pro

Rounds are 30 minutes, opponent chooses topic. If the topic is unfair, it should count as an automatic forfeit.

opponent can argue in the first round and pass on the final round or just use the first round as acceptance.

Good luck
Complicated_Mind

Con

I accept this challenge. This should be interesting. I will let my opponent begin the following topic: Racial Affirmative Action Should Be A Major Determining Factor in College Admissions.

He will be affirming as Pro, I will be negating as Con.

I thank my opponent for this experimental opportunity! :).
Debate Round No. 1
afterbirth

Pro

It's no secret that there are a disproportionate amount of blacks miss out on college. There is a history of discrimination in the United States and other places which have contributed to the adverse conditions which affect certain minorities. Affirmative action is a good way to make up for the adverse conditions black people face as a result of not having the generational wealth that other groups have.

1. Black people started out as in the United States, which means they haven't had the advantages of cumulative wealth gains as white people. If your parents are wealthy, you're more likely to be wealthy and in positions of privilege and these advantages extend indefinitnd the generational wealth advantages of whites aren't something very many black people have.

According to the New York times quoting a recent study:

"Wealth is a measure of cumulative advantage or disadvantage," said Roderick Harrison, a researcher at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a Washington research organization that focuses on black issues. "The fact that black and Hispanic wealth is a fraction of white wealth also reflects a history of discrimination." http://www.nytimes.com...

2. Now we know that this cumulative wealth advantage helps minorities overcome the disadvantages they start out with just by being born non white. Let's focus on whether they are weaker candidates for the schooling.

a. A lot of minority candidates perform lower on tests becaf self esteem issues from perceived racial biases according to some psychologists. http://news.stanford.edu...

So in order to get the best candidates, you'll to actually employ affirmative action.

b. In the book outliers, its mentioned that after an IQ of 120, creativity is what determines real world success best, and that is where affirmative action students have an advantage.
Complicated_Mind

Con

Good luck, Pro.

=========My Case=========

C1: Race-based affirmative action is self-defeating. Firstly, it is self-defeating because many people, whether it is true and/or fair or not, will have a subconscious or conscious bias *against* the group benefiting from affirmative action. For example, racial affirmative pretty much always puts favor into the black or Hispanic group. Many Americans would refuse to (or not want to) go to a black or Hispanic doctor, physician, and so on, as they are under the impression that the black or Hispanic mentioned likely got their job/career due to bias towards their race.

It IS likely that MANY people would think this way whether it is fair or not.

In reverse, it would probably diminish some self-respect, as some blacks and Hispanics would ask the same question: Would I have gotten this qualification if I was white, or Asian?

BTW: I know this is about COLLEGE admissions, but no one could obtain such jobs (usually) without going to a good college. So many doctors WOULD get their job partially from affirmative action.

C2: AC is racist and doesn't actually look at who's disadvantaged. Whether or not blacks, are on average, more economically disadvantaged than whites is completely irrelevant. What IS relevant is that SOME whites are more disadvantaged than SOME blacks and SOME blacks are more disadvantaged than SOME whites. Because of this, it is a logical fallacy to have ALL blacks get points that ALL whites don't get simply because of their skin color. It is not only illogical and unfair, but also doesn't consider the fact that a black kid with wealthy parents could get accepted into an Ivy League college over a white kid with DIRT POOR parents and the SAME qualifications.

C3: It harms colleges. This contention is sweet, and to the point. Blacks and Hispanics could easily get into a college with a certain score that they would not be able to get in otherwise. Asian acceptance rates don't reflect their scores.
Debate Round No. 2
afterbirth

Pro

"Many Americans would refuse to (or not want to) go to a black or Hispanic doctor, physician, and so on, as they are under the impression that the black or Hispanic mentioned likely got their job/career due to bias towards their race."

I've already addressed this. This is not what we see in the real world. School entrances, particularly to elite schools are a result of not only hard work but a huge emphasis on SAT scores. However this doesn't actually translate to real world success. To be honest affirmative action candidates no problems getting clients when they get into the real world and even if they did, it's not the schools problem. The school gave them a chance.

"Gladwell suggests that IQ is not directly proportional to real life success. An IQ of 170 is likely to think better than an IQ of 70. But at high IQ"s, the relationship with success breaks down. An IQ of 130 is just as likely to win a Nobel prize as an IQ of 180. Your IQ just has to be good enough, and you have as good a chance as the smarter guys to succeed, because other things begin to count in life, like one"s personality." https://timothywalter.wordpress.com...

C3- My opponent hasn't adequately explained why AF harms schools. There is nothing for me to rebut here.

C2- Maybe affirmative action isn't a perfect solution but it's better than the so as it does correct a lot of the disadvantages people face by not being able to capitalize on generational wealth or being born disadvantaged but my opponent hasn't offered a counter plan. so the debate at this point is about whether affirmative action is better than the status quo, and I've successfully established that it is.
Complicated_Mind

Con

=REBUTTALS=

R1: I've already somewhat refuted this point in my initial arguments. Your arguments would be substantial if we were debating about socio-economic affirmative action, but this is RACIAL affirmative action. Even if blacks are more disadvantaged on AVERAGE, plenty of whites are disadvantaged as well, but don't get the same benefits as well-off black people. You cannot say "more black people are poor give them benefits" when some whites are just as disadvantaged.

R2A: Self-esteem of Asians and whites would also go down. They know they are at the disadvantaged with affirmative action in place. They are simply trading who's, on balance, disadvantaged. The way to end discrimination, is to END discrimination, not discriminating against the better-off. Blacks being discriminated against in the past doesn't justify discriminating whites and Asians. Getting rid of ALL discrimination is key.

R2B: This argument is COMPLETELY irrelevant. An IQ of 120 is in the 89th-90th percentile, so not only does this apply to a small fragment of the population, but it has little to do with affirmative action period. Plus, how does "affirmative action students" have more imagination?

----

I will crystallize my third contention as I have lots of character space left, and I was cut short from character limits in the second round.

Affirmative action, simply put, allows less qualified applicants get accepted into any given university before a more qualified applicant simply due to the "race" that they were born as. This harms colleges for a plethora of reasons:

Firstly, because Asians have the highest average SAT scores [1], they are discriminated against in the AC process. Bear in mind Asians have been discriminated against as well. To top it off AC is VERY bias against them.

For example, a study found Asians get a -140 penalty, while get an extra 310 points.

Another example: a white student that scored 1360 on the SATs would be on equal footing with an Asian.
Debate Round No. 3
afterbirth

Pro

CR1- Con's response isn't adequate. He hasn't offered a counter plan. This is about affirmative action verses the status quo. Black people as well as a few other minorities are disadvantaged as a result of America's early history of racism. They don't benefit from the generational accumulation of wealth and advantage that other groups do.

Affirmative action will certainly help a bunch of disadvantaged people. My opponent points out that the plan isnrfect and may leave out some disadvantaged people but no plan is perfect. Perfection is the enemy of good.

What the plan does do, some of the disadvantages that remain from earlier racist times. It also does a lot for a bunch of currently disadvantaged people. Again it's not a perfect solution but is better than what we got in place. It's not enough for my opponent to point out imperfections. He needs to show why the status quo is better.

CR2- We need to do our part to help disadvantaged youth. Sure some deserving white students may be left out but under the status quo, a ton of deserving minority students are left out. To have a more fair society, diverse workplace and a true meritocracy we need to reverse some of the residual effects of the past.

CR3- "Affirmative action, simply put, allows less qualified applicants get accepted into any given university before a more qualified applicant simply due to the "race" that they were born as. "

This is simply not true. My arguments about their self esteem hurting the results of tests and tests not being an or of real world success are being ignored. Affirmative action students are often equally qualified. if not more qualified than other students.

"Gladwell suggests that IQ is not directly proportional to real life success. An IQ of 170 is likely to think better than an IQ of 70. But at high IQ"s, the relationship with success breaks down. An IQ of 130 is just as likely to win a Nobel prize as an IQ of 180."

Thanks for the debate. Vote Pro
Complicated_Mind

Con

RND3REB1: My opponent is missing my point. I am for giving one a chance based on their skills, not their race like he is. My opponent admits that he is for unqualified applicants into colleges as long as they get "a chance." This is both fallacious and asinine. We need the most qualified, not giving unqualified candidates a chance over a qualified one. SAT scores are an important indicator of success in college (like GPA, etc).

As said above, a 130+ IQ is in the top 3-4% so it is irrelevant to nearly all candidates. http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com...

R3R3: It harms schools because the less qualified override the more qualified. As I've said before: a white student that scored 1360 on the SATs would be on equal footing with an Asian student that scored 1500. Blacks gain 310 points, Asians (historically discriminated against, too) get a -140 penalty. This is unjust. http://priceonomics.com...

My opponent also stated in rounds three and four that affirmative action is better than the status quo. Currently, affirmative action IS used, and is therefore the status quo.

As I've stated many times before, eliminating ALL discrimination is better than affirmative action. Affirmative action eliminates NO discrimination. In fact, even with affirmative action in place, many people still discriminate against them because they think that they probably got into high positions based on affirmative action.

If we eliminate all discrimination, it will eventually dwindle down close to nothingness. Just look at how blacks have risen up and are equal to whites (except in AA). Encouraging NO discrimination will continue this trend.

With NO discrimination, self-esteem of all youth will go up. What Pro fails to realize is that while blacks self-esteem may go up due to AA, Asian's self-esteem will go down; which is just as wrong. As stated above, and in the link, Asians are facing stress b/c of this. And vote CON.
Debate Round No. 4
71 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
"I disagree, for the most part. There is a problem with blacks *because* society keeps trying to discriminate in their favor to compensate for society's past wrongdoings. The best thing we can do is END discrimination as much as possible, starting with the application process. I've admitted eliminating *ALL* discrimination is impossible, but getting rid of it in programs such as these would help mitigate discrimination as a whole. Con never provided strong reasons to justify discriminating against Asians. They are also a minority with a history of discrimination."

But blacks are naturally discriminated against, hence the lower SES (at least, this was what Pro argued). If not AA, then what? How do you stop this discrimination? I understand that Asians are slightly affected (from what you argued in the debate), but blacks are clearly discriminated against. There was just no plan to stop this. I'm not convinced that getting rid of these programs would help mitigate discrimination, based on the debate.

"Blacks, as a whole, having less money doesn't justify ethically discriminating against Asians as well. Con never confronted the fact that some blacks, like any group, are well off, too."

I remember reading that you said that some blacks were like this, yet this implies that a lot aren't. Pro showed how many are, so more is better than less. His point still came out mitigated by what you said, yet still positive.
Posted by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
I'll have another think in a tick. Just have to deal with something...
Posted by Complicated_Mind 2 years ago
Complicated_Mind
How embarrassing this is my debate with the most views, yet it is probably one of my lowest-quality ones on my part -_-. Sigh. Still, it was an interesting experience.
Posted by Complicated_Mind 2 years ago
Complicated_Mind
For your second response the only productive thing to do is agree to disagree.
Posted by Complicated_Mind 2 years ago
Complicated_Mind
Disregard the second response part, my computer had a delay.
Posted by Complicated_Mind 2 years ago
Complicated_Mind
"You implicitly conceded the premise that there is a problem with blacks, that something needed to be done, yet your counter-plan lacks a plan. How are we going to eliminate all discrimination when you've conceded that blacks are disadvantaged? Pro showed that whilst AA discriminates, it would still be an overall good. You just highlighted the bad points, which mitigated his argument, yet there was no actual plan from you."

I disagree, for the most part. There is a problem with blacks *because* society keeps trying to discriminate in their favor to compensate for society's past wrongdoings. The best thing we can do is END discrimination as much as possible, starting with the application process. I've admitted eliminating *ALL* discrimination is impossible, but getting rid of it in programs such as these would help mitigate discrimination as a whole. Con never provided strong reasons to justify discriminating against Asians. They are also a minority with a history of discrimination.

Blacks, as a whole, having less money doesn't justify ethically discriminating against Asians as well. Con never confronted the fact that some blacks, like any group, are well off, too.

"You need to end the factors that cause discrimination to stop discrimination."

I'm assuming you mean ending the average poorer socio-economic status of blacks as a whole?

Petty much explained above.

I would appreciate you responding to the second part of my responses as well, thank you.
Posted by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
"Again, regarding self-esteem, you are lobbing false accusations at my arguments. My source talks of Asians having low self-esteem regarding applying as an Asian as shown by the quotations of some Asian applicants themselves. Though, I admit, this isn't a necessarily STRONG source, as it is singular, but you yourself admit Pro provides only a little evidence. I also provided a little evidence, so another reconsideration here would be greatly appreciated."

Fair enough; I appear to have missed that. The quote was not in the debate, but you did reference it. I am sorry. I still think that Pro is winning, though, since this effectively ties this contention, yet Pro was winning overall despite this contention. I rescind my comments.

"Yet another statement I disagree with. It affects them as shown by the comments in my source. It affects them as they are hesitant to put down their real race on applications. This is unjust as blacks and Hispanics would have an unfair advantage. Therefore, Asians are scared and being discriminated against in the application process. This is unjust in every possible definition of the word."

Your source didn't have this degree of impact. I am not convinced by a couple of quotes that "Asians are scared and being discriminated against". Again, the implicit premise that blacks are disadvantaged was conceded by you and there is no plan to fix this. Your arguments are purely nullification, which worked on some points, but still left some of Pro's points with a bit of impact. Again, you needed a plan yourself.

I hope this helps.
Posted by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
"Your "Con lacks a plan" point is null. I've had this discussion with whiteflame. My counterplan, as described in both rounds three and four, was to eliminate *ALL* discrimination against anybody. Since affirmative action is simply self-defeating, as it simply discriminates against different people (Asians being one. Ironically enough, they are a minority). So, my counterplan is simply ignoring the race if any given applicant. Then it will dwindle down to nothingness (that is my contention and counterplan)."

You implicitly conceded the premise that there is a problem with blacks, that something needed to be done, yet your counter-plan lacks a plan. How are we going to eliminate all discrimination when you've conceded that blacks are disadvantaged? Pro showed that whilst AA discriminates, it would still be an overall good. You just highlighted the bad points, which mitigated his argument, yet there was no actual plan from you.

"I would appreciate a reconsideration on that comment. I have a plan as well, but you didn't mention it. As such, you implied I had no plan. This is a false accusation. Such a contention needs no source: to end discrimination, we must END discrimination."

This is circular reasoning. You can't end discrimination by ending discrimination. You need to end the factors that cause discrimination to stop discrimination, hence why you do not have a plan imo.
Posted by Complicated_Mind 2 years ago
Complicated_Mind
Response to Zarroette part 1/2

Your "Con lacks a plan" point is null. I've had this discussion with whiteflame. My counterplan, as described in both rounds three and four, was to eliminate *ALL* discrimination against anybody. Since affirmative action is simply self-defeating, as it simply discriminates against different people (Asians being one. Ironically enough, they are a minority). So, my counterplan is simply ignoring the race if any given applicant. Then it will dwindle down to nothingness (that is my contention and counterplan).

I would appreciate a reconsideration on that comment. I have a plan as well, but you didn't mention it. As such, you implied I had no plan. This is a false accusation. Such a contention needs no source: to end discrimination, we must END discrimination.

Again, regarding self-esteem, you are lobbing false accusations at my arguments. My source talks of Asians having low self-esteem regarding applying as an Asian as shown by the quotations of some Asian applicants themselves. Though, I admit, this isn't a necessarily STRONG source, as it is singular, but you yourself admit Pro provides only a little evidence. I also provided a little evidence, so another reconsideration here would be greatly appreciated.
Posted by Complicated_Mind 2 years ago
Complicated_Mind
Response to Zarroette part 2/2

"Con shows that there is a clear bias against Asians, but again how does this affect them? Where is the impact? The link is super strong and is ready to be used for impact. But "this is unjust" is not sufficient for an impact."

Yet another statement I disagree with. It affects them as shown by the comments in my source. It affects them as they are hesitant to put down their real race on applications. This is unjust as blacks and Hispanics would have an unfair advantage. Therefore, Asians are scared and being discriminated against in the application process. This is unjust in every possible definition of the word.

Again, reconsideration would be appreciated.

I appreciate the RFD, definitely descriptive, and I'm sure it took some time, so thanks! But I feel I need to discuss anything I disagree with for the sake of fairness to myself.

I admit, I would've done much better had I had more than 2,000 characters as a limit and more than half an hour between rounds, but it was fun!

Either way I respect your vote, but I feel I need to UNDERSTAND the votes as well.

Let me know if I am misinterpreting anything.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by BLAHthedebator 2 years ago
BLAHthedebator
afterbirthComplicated_MindTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Literally the debate boils down to Pro's argument about how AA is the best method we have in place, and Con's contention about how this only causes more discrimination. Con used his argument to mitigate most of Pro's arguments, and although it did not seem like he had a plan, ending discrimination and the factors that make it up is a plan in itself. Hence Con won imo.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
afterbirthComplicated_MindTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.
Vote Placed by Raisor 2 years ago
Raisor
afterbirthComplicated_MindTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
afterbirthComplicated_MindTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Given in comments.