Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Arguing in the Last round

kohai
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2011 12:07:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
What do you guys think of that? It is obviously not fair to bring up new information so your opponent cannot respond.

http://www.debate.org...

This is a debate where my opponent forfeited round 3 and forfeited in the final round. The person argued in the last round and now I cannot respond.
1) Whatever has contradictory attributes does not exist.
2) The Biblical God has contradictory attributes.
3) Therefore, the Biblical God does not exist
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2011 12:25:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Interesting how you only seem to bring up "debate problems," when they pertain to yourself.

Anyway, there was nothing explicitly wrong with his arguing: he never got the chance to present that rebuttal, and the rules of that debate did not say to not argue in the last round.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Raisor
Posts: 4,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2011 4:38:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Anyway, there was nothing explicitly wrong with his arguing: he never got the chance to present that rebuttal, and the rules of that debate did not say to not argue in the last round.

Presenting new arguments in the last round is incredibly abusive and unfair.

You dont have to explicitly agree on a rule in order for it to be present. Its really just common sense that it is unfair to bring up a new point that your opponent is disallowed from responding to.

These comments are totally unrelated to the debate referenced and are meant only in a general sense.
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2011 4:48:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/21/2011 4:38:03 PM, Raisor wrote:
Anyway, there was nothing explicitly wrong with his arguing: he never got the chance to present that rebuttal, and the rules of that debate did not say to not argue in the last round.

Presenting new arguments in the last round is incredibly abusive and unfair.

You dont have to explicitly agree on a rule in order for it to be present. Its really just common sense that it is unfair to bring up a new point that your opponent is disallowed from responding to.

These comments are totally unrelated to the debate referenced and are meant only in a general sense.

Agree. If your opponent is running Utilitarianism and you spent the whole round saying that there's not actually a net benefit, but in the last round you run deontology and say net benefits don't even matter, that should obviously be ignored.