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

debating advice needed

Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2014 12:39:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Hi. If you start a debate and your opponent posts a response that reframes the debate entirely, using different definitions of terms, etc., what's the best way to respond? Assuming that nothing was defined in round 1. Are there any rules about it?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2014 12:50:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/1/2014 12:39:48 AM, Garbanza wrote:
Hi. If you start a debate and your opponent posts a response that reframes the debate entirely, using different definitions of terms, etc., what's the best way to respond? Assuming that nothing was defined in round 1. Are there any rules about it?

Just make sure that you and your opponent are using fair definitions of each word and don't let up on your POV about how each term should be properly defined, also try not to let the difference of opinions on the terms distract too much from the debate. Just state your opinion, move on and learn to make your resolutions more clear.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2014 12:59:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/1/2014 12:50:13 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/1/2014 12:39:48 AM, Garbanza wrote:
Hi. If you start a debate and your opponent posts a response that reframes the debate entirely, using different definitions of terms, etc., what's the best way to respond? Assuming that nothing was defined in round 1. Are there any rules about it?

Just make sure that you and your opponent are using fair definitions of each word and don't let up on your POV about how each term should be properly defined, also try not to let the difference of opinions on the terms distract too much from the debate. Just state your opinion, move on and learn to make your resolutions more clear.

Okay. Thanks.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2014 1:03:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/1/2014 12:39:48 AM, Garbanza wrote:
Hi. If you start a debate and your opponent posts a response that reframes the debate entirely, using different definitions of terms, etc., what's the best way to respond? Assuming that nothing was defined in round 1. Are there any rules about it?

I see you've fallen prey to Mikal the resolution-sniper...
Normally, I would say to call him out for his semantics and show that given the context of your opening argument it is clear that by "accused" you meant "convict".... HOWEVER, you did specifically clarify towards the end of your opening argument that you did mean 'accused', in accordance with the way Mikal defined it, so all his arguments do apply... you're pretty much screwed, unless you can build a very, very convincing case that being accused of rape twice is the rough equivalent of a conviction.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2014 1:15:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/1/2014 1:03:48 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 10/1/2014 12:39:48 AM, Garbanza wrote:
Hi. If you start a debate and your opponent posts a response that reframes the debate entirely, using different definitions of terms, etc., what's the best way to respond? Assuming that nothing was defined in round 1. Are there any rules about it?

I see you've fallen prey to Mikal the resolution-sniper...
Normally, I would say to call him out for his semantics and show that given the context of your opening argument it is clear that by "accused" you meant "convict".... HOWEVER, you did specifically clarify towards the end of your opening argument that you did mean 'accused', in accordance with the way Mikal defined it, so all his arguments do apply... you're pretty much screwed, unless you can build a very, very convincing case that being accused of rape twice is the rough equivalent of a conviction.

Thanks! But no, I did mean accused. But by "should" I meant encouraged or recommended, not that it would be forced.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2014 1:23:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/1/2014 1:15:32 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/1/2014 1:03:48 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 10/1/2014 12:39:48 AM, Garbanza wrote:
Hi. If you start a debate and your opponent posts a response that reframes the debate entirely, using different definitions of terms, etc., what's the best way to respond? Assuming that nothing was defined in round 1. Are there any rules about it?

I see you've fallen prey to Mikal the resolution-sniper...
Normally, I would say to call him out for his semantics and show that given the context of your opening argument it is clear that by "accused" you meant "convict".... HOWEVER, you did specifically clarify towards the end of your opening argument that you did mean 'accused', in accordance with the way Mikal defined it, so all his arguments do apply... you're pretty much screwed, unless you can build a very, very convincing case that being accused of rape twice is the rough equivalent of a conviction.

Thanks! But no, I did mean accused. But by "should" I meant encouraged or recommended, not that it would be forced.

Hmm... that could certainly work in your favor. Be sure to make that very clear in your argument. The way you phrased the 'PEACE' portion of your opening argument does go to support that interpretation of the resolution, so it could actually work out :D
Mikal will definitely contest that, though, since all of his arguments are based on the assumption that it would be a coercive process lol.
Next time, just set out clear definitions in Round 1 XD
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2014 1:25:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/1/2014 1:23:18 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 10/1/2014 1:15:32 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/1/2014 1:03:48 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 10/1/2014 12:39:48 AM, Garbanza wrote:
Hi. If you start a debate and your opponent posts a response that reframes the debate entirely, using different definitions of terms, etc., what's the best way to respond? Assuming that nothing was defined in round 1. Are there any rules about it?

I see you've fallen prey to Mikal the resolution-sniper...
Normally, I would say to call him out for his semantics and show that given the context of your opening argument it is clear that by "accused" you meant "convict".... HOWEVER, you did specifically clarify towards the end of your opening argument that you did mean 'accused', in accordance with the way Mikal defined it, so all his arguments do apply... you're pretty much screwed, unless you can build a very, very convincing case that being accused of rape twice is the rough equivalent of a conviction.

Thanks! But no, I did mean accused. But by "should" I meant encouraged or recommended, not that it would be forced.

Hmm... that could certainly work in your favor. Be sure to make that very clear in your argument. The way you phrased the 'PEACE' portion of your opening argument does go to support that interpretation of the resolution, so it could actually work out :D
Mikal will definitely contest that, though, since all of his arguments are based on the assumption that it would be a coercive process lol.
Next time, just set out clear definitions in Round 1 XD

that's good advice. thanks. :)
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2014 8:52:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/1/2014 12:39:48 AM, Garbanza wrote:
Hi. If you start a debate and your opponent posts a response that reframes the debate entirely, using different definitions of terms, etc., what's the best way to respond? Assuming that nothing was defined in round 1. Are there any rules about it?

If you didn't stipulate definitions in the opening round, then definitions are open for debate, and you have to argue for your definitions.
"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