Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

burden of prove is shared?

suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2013 3:41:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Just would like to ask for a clarification the debating rule on this site. What do you mean when it is stated on the topic that burden of prove is shared?

Does it mean each have to present evidences for his point? or one need to prove a point from both side? or no point need a prove?
larztheloser
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2013 6:14:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The term is used by ignorant debaters who don't understand that BOP is an instruction to the voter, not the debater. Voters should ignore it because it makes no sense. What's usually meant is that straight negative cases are not allowed, so both sides are required to make some kind of constructive argument.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2013 9:23:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/27/2013 3:41:03 AM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
What do you mean when it is stated on the topic that burden of prove is shared?

Let's say the resolution is, "Resolved: Joe is from Kansas." And lets say that Pro argues first, and spends his whole time complaining about how confusing British money is.

If Pro has the burden of proof, then all Con has to do is point out that Pro never proved the resolution to be true. Con can win merely by pointing out that Pro didn't prove his case.

If the burden of proof is shared, then Con still has to prove that Joe is not from Kansas. Pro didn't prove his case, but, to avoid a tie, Con still has to prove his case.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2013 9:30:52 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
In academic debate, resolutions are usually written so that Pro is affirming a change in the status quo. Pro must prove that if the resolution were to be enacted, it would be beneficial. I think it is like a criminal trial in which the defendant must be proved guilty -- although not, in the case of a debate,"beyond a reasonable doubt," I'd say "by a clear preponderance of evidence." If Pro makes no good arguments, Con can win by saying nothing,

DDO has no rule about how resolutions are written, so Pro may be defending the status quo, It's up to the reader to decide who has the burden of proof. The debaters may agree how they want the debate judged, but readers are not obliged to vote that way, Usually, Pro is affirming something and has the burden of proving it, but resolutions can be worded so that Con is actually the one affirming.

"Shared burden of proof" means that the better evidence and argument wins. This can make sense for a resolution in which there is no obvious status quo, such as "Cats are better than dogs." or "Naruto would beat Batman." Still, I think the side affirming ought to have to prove the resolution. By comparison, civil trials are determined by a "preponderance of evidence." The reader is free to be persuaded or not as to what judging criteria to use.

It often doesn't matter, because one side emerges as having won by any criteria, but sometimes it matters. A person making a radical or outrageous claim has to meet a high burden of proof.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2013 10:51:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
In less formal situations, such as DDO, a question may be debated such as "Should I buy a Chevy, or a Ford??" If that is the case then the burden of proof is shared equally, as both sides have to present a winning case. I prefer the question form as that means that both sides have to work equally hard in order to get the win.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2013 11:08:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/27/2013 10:51:53 AM, medic0506 wrote:
In less formal situations, such as DDO, a question may be debated such as "Should I buy a Chevy, or a Ford??" If that is the case then the burden of proof is shared equally, as both sides have to present a winning case. I prefer the question form as that means that both sides have to work equally hard in order to get the win.

A question isn't a resolution. You will have to take one side or other, so just say, "I should buy a Chevy rather than a Ford." the resolution is implicit in what you end up affirming.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2013 3:31:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
That wouldn't have occurred to me, to assume a shared burden of proof because the "resolution" is in the form of a question.

If you want a shared burden of proof, then you should say so explicitly when you initiate the debate. Otherwise, expect people to assume that Pro (actually the party that argues first) has the burden.

It costs you nothing to clearly state where you want the burden when you set up the debate. If you don't do that, your debate is likely to be, in large part, a debate over who has the burden.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2013 5:01:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/27/2013 3:31:46 PM, wiploc wrote:
That wouldn't have occurred to me, to assume a shared burden of proof because the "resolution" is in the form of a question.

If you want a shared burden of proof, then you should say so explicitly when you initiate the debate. Otherwise, expect people to assume that Pro (actually the party that argues first) has the burden.

It costs you nothing to clearly state where you want the burden when you set up the debate. If you don't do that, your debate is likely to be, in large part, a debate over who has the burden.

I do agree with that. Who has the BoP, ideally, should be understood from the outset so the debaters don't have to spend time determining that, and the voters don't have to assume anything.