Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Proposition For Site-Wide Definition of BoP

Sui_Generis
Posts: 493
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 7:23:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Oftentimes, people say "BoP is shared." This is obviously impossible, and you will never hear this in an official debate tournament.

What I propose is this:

Either propose a commonly-held standard to, when setting BoP, to also set the SoP, or Standard of Proof.

OR

We just place in the site FAQ and rules that the BoP Standard is "Clear and Convincing Evidence" or "Preponderance of Evidence" (I propose the former.)

See here:

http://dbp.idebate.org...

The latter option is what people who argue for "shared BoP" are effectively using, anyway.
"Mundus vult decipi--the world wants to be deceived. The truth is too complex and frightening; the taste for the truth is an acquired taste that few acquire."
-Martin Buber, I and Thou
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 9:13:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
why not use a dictionary? :D

The philosophical burden of proof or onus (probandi) is the obligation on a party in an epistemic dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

(yes I realise that isn't a dictionary)
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 9:20:52 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/26/2013 9:13:13 AM, Smithereens wrote:
why not use a dictionary? :D

The philosophical burden of proof or onus (probandi) is the obligation on a party in an epistemic dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

(yes I realise that isn't a dictionary)

A sufficient Philosophical warrant is all that is needed.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
Sui_Generis
Posts: 493
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 9:25:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/26/2013 9:20:52 AM, Pennington wrote:
At 4/26/2013 9:13:13 AM, Smithereens wrote:
why not use a dictionary? :D

The philosophical burden of proof or onus (probandi) is the obligation on a party in an epistemic dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

(yes I realise that isn't a dictionary)

A sufficient Philosophical warrant is all that is needed.

What does that mean, though?

In practice, I see "BoP on Pro[or Con]" and then people saying "Since BOP is on Pro, all I have to do is prove that there's a shadow of a doubt and he has failed to meet BOP."

That's stupid and lame.
"Mundus vult decipi--the world wants to be deceived. The truth is too complex and frightening; the taste for the truth is an acquired taste that few acquire."
-Martin Buber, I and Thou
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2013 3:46:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think it makes good sense to stipulate whether the burden of proof is shared or not.

For example, suppose the resolution is "God exists." If the burden of proof is only on Pro, then Pro has to give arguments for the existence of God. Con does not have to prove that the resolution is false. He doesn't have to prove the negation of the resolution. He just has to refute Pro's arguments FOR God, showing that Pro hasn't proved that the resolution is true.

But if the burden of proof is shared, then it's not enough for Con to refute Pro's arguments for God; he has to also make arguments demonstrating that the resolution is false.

So I think it makes good sense to stipulate whether the burden of proof is shared or not in a debate. A lot of people mistakenly think that if you can refute the arguments FOR a point of view that that is enough to show that the view is false, but it isn't. It is possible to make a fallacious argument for a true proposition, so refuting the argument doesn't show that the resolution is false; it only shows that the resolution hasn't been demonstrated to be true. So there's a practical difference in having a shared burden of proof vs. one person having the burden of proof in a debate.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2013 1:05:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/26/2013 9:20:52 AM, Pennington wrote:
At 4/26/2013 9:13:13 AM, Smithereens wrote:
why not use a dictionary? :D

The philosophical burden of proof or onus (probandi) is the obligation on a party in an epistemic dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

(yes I realise that isn't a dictionary)

A sufficient Philosophical warrant is all that is needed.

wasting time trying to obtain warrants just lets criminals get away. We need more no-knock philosophical warrants!
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
CJKAllstar
Posts: 408
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2014 3:48:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/26/2013 7:23:07 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Oftentimes, people say "BoP is shared." This is obviously impossible, and you will never hear this in an official debate tournament.

What I propose is this:

Either propose a commonly-held standard to, when setting BoP, to also set the SoP, or Standard of Proof.

OR

We just place in the site FAQ and rules that the BoP Standard is "Clear and Convincing Evidence" or "Preponderance of Evidence" (I propose the former.)

See here:

http://dbp.idebate.org...

The latter option is what people who argue for "shared BoP" are effectively using, anyway.

*Thread revived*

I would just like to ask anyone why BOP cannot be shared. If the debate was for example, "Salt vs. Pepper", then both would have to prove that their item of food is better. Both would have BOP. No one has made a claim, so how can BOP be on one side?
"Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." - George Orwell
Crescendo
Posts: 470
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2014 3:49:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/11/2014 3:48:31 PM, CJKAllstar wrote:
At 4/26/2013 7:23:07 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Oftentimes, people say "BoP is shared." This is obviously impossible, and you will never hear this in an official debate tournament.

What I propose is this:

Either propose a commonly-held standard to, when setting BoP, to also set the SoP, or Standard of Proof.

OR

We just place in the site FAQ and rules that the BoP Standard is "Clear and Convincing Evidence" or "Preponderance of Evidence" (I propose the former.)

See here:

http://dbp.idebate.org...

The latter option is what people who argue for "shared BoP" are effectively using, anyway.

*Thread revived*

I would just like to ask anyone why BOP cannot be shared. If the debate was for example, "Salt vs. Pepper", then both would have to prove that their item of food is better. Both would have BOP. No one has made a claim, so how can BOP be on one side?

All hail the Necroposter!
My View of the World:
http://www.debate.org...

My Greatest Debate (As of so far):
http://www.debate.org...
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2014 3:52:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/11/2014 3:48:31 PM, CJKAllstar wrote:
At 4/26/2013 7:23:07 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Oftentimes, people say "BoP is shared." This is obviously impossible, and you will never hear this in an official debate tournament.

What I propose is this:

Either propose a commonly-held standard to, when setting BoP, to also set the SoP, or Standard of Proof.

OR

We just place in the site FAQ and rules that the BoP Standard is "Clear and Convincing Evidence" or "Preponderance of Evidence" (I propose the former.)

See here:

http://dbp.idebate.org...

The latter option is what people who argue for "shared BoP" are effectively using, anyway.

*Thread revived*

I would just like to ask anyone why BOP cannot be shared. If the debate was for example, "Salt vs. Pepper", then both would have to prove that their item of food is better. Both would have BOP. No one has made a claim, so how can BOP be on one side?

I prefer shared BOP for preference debates (ie. which of two things is better). For debates proposing a new policy or changing/challenging the status quo, I prefer BOP being be on the proposer.
Zaradi
Posts: 14,125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2014 4:00:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/11/2014 3:48:31 PM, CJKAllstar wrote:
At 4/26/2013 7:23:07 AM, Sui_Generis wrote:
Oftentimes, people say "BoP is shared." This is obviously impossible, and you will never hear this in an official debate tournament.

What I propose is this:

Either propose a commonly-held standard to, when setting BoP, to also set the SoP, or Standard of Proof.

OR

We just place in the site FAQ and rules that the BoP Standard is "Clear and Convincing Evidence" or "Preponderance of Evidence" (I propose the former.)

See here:

http://dbp.idebate.org...

The latter option is what people who argue for "shared BoP" are effectively using, anyway.

*Thread revived*

I would just like to ask anyone why BOP cannot be shared. If the debate was for example, "Salt vs. Pepper", then both would have to prove that their item of food is better. Both would have BOP. No one has made a claim, so how can BOP be on one side?

That's not what BOP is though, and that resolution is a hella bad example.

Since I don't feel like getting into a lengthy explanation of why BOP can't technically be shared, I'll keep it short: a resolution is supposed to make a claim that the affirmative has to defend. Asking someone to have the BOP to negate something is stupid. Therefore, BOP is one-sided.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...