Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

A Crazy Idea

Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2009 5:52:35 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
So, in most conventional debates, it's Pro v Con; Aff v Neg; two positions clashing.

However, an interesting idea (although it would probably take away the essence of actual debate) would be to take an idea that both people agree on (as in, both side with Pro, or both with Con), and see who can better prove their point. As in, we see who affirms or negates the resolution in a higher quality manner.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2009 5:56:30 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Thing is, that wouldn't be a debate.

That sounds like the Sermon thing that's in the Challenge Period right now.

It would be interesting, but you'd see a lot of idea stealing.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2009 7:55:59 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/11/2009 5:56:30 PM, mongeese wrote:
Thing is, that wouldn't be a debate.

That sounds like the Sermon thing that's in the Challenge Period right now.

It would be interesting, but you'd see a lot of idea stealing.

I agree with mongeese. It wouldn't be an interesting read, too.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2009 9:11:30 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Sounds like Austrians versus Chicagoans a lot of the time, though not all of the time.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2009 11:07:47 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/11/2009 6:09:18 PM, Puck wrote:
Team debates. >.>

No no no, not at all. It would be more like...

A: "Here is why the resolution is true."

Then, person B would try to do a better job of proving the resolution true, whether through more solid arguments, better evidence, etc. Just an odd idea.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2009 11:08:40 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/11/2009 5:56:30 PM, mongeese wrote:
Thing is, that wouldn't be a debate.

That sounds like the Sermon thing that's in the Challenge Period right now.

It would be interesting, but you'd see a lot of idea stealing.

Maybe it could be done partially in the format of "Who will run out of legitimate arguments first?"
MTGandP
Posts: 702
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2009 11:09:47 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
There are some issues with this idea. It gives an advantage to whoever goes first, since that person can use all the best arguments. It would also help if each side got an opportunity to explain why the other side's arguments are not very good.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2009 12:41:58 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/11/2009 11:09:47 PM, MTGandP wrote:
There are some issues with this idea. It gives an advantage to whoever goes first, since that person can use all the best arguments. It would also help if each side got an opportunity to explain why the other side's arguments are not very good.

Well, perhaps we put a 3-argument limit onto these debates, or something to that effect; we'd obviously have to have a few special stipulations if it were actually to work. That, and really, the person who goes last also has the advantage of getting the last word, so it's relatively even; plus, it's equally possible that the person who goes last will have the better arguments, perhaps by taking the resolution in a different direction.

And, that's the other part, certainly; you would have to explain why the other person isn't doing as good a job affirming/negating the resolution. I think it would also give way to arguing for and against different methods of debating the resolution (for example, having someone who is debating semantics try to out-negate someone who is trying to legitimately negate the resolution.)
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2009 5:32:12 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
This idea is interesting in that someone could learn how to make a better argument about such and such, without having to argue the opposing view. It would be interesting to see how it works out.
ToastOfDestiny
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2009 6:40:44 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Dude. This is freaky - I thought of this just after I woke up today.
At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
Our demise and industrial destruction
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Only exists in your head, as already shown.

At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
reveal why you answer with a question mark
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Because it was a question.

RFDs Pl0x:
http://www.debate.org...
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2009 8:52:09 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/12/2009 6:40:44 AM, ToastOfDestiny wrote:
Dude. This is freaky - I thought of this just after I woke up today.

That happens sometimes. It's not as bad as me though. I've dreamed of DDO before. Yes, it is that bad.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2009 9:08:42 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Would both debaters still be using the same definitions?
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
MTGandP
Posts: 702
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2009 1:00:26 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Maybe each side could choose a different value premise and criterion, and whoever supports theirs best is the winner.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2009 9:23:17 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/12/2009 1:00:26 PM, MTGandP wrote:
Maybe each side could choose a different value premise and criterion, and whoever supports theirs best is the winner.

I love LD debate and all, but that would kind of destroy the purpose of the idea; it's to try and show which method of affirming/negating a resolution is best (e.g. semantic arguments v LD, or policy arguments v resolutional critiques, etc.)

As much as I love LD, I couldn't force everyone to adhere to that format.