Total Posts:1|Showing Posts:1-1
Who has the Bruden of Proof in LD debates?
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2014 1:38:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Excerpt from the Link:
"The lack of presumption and burden of proof standards lead to irresponsible argumentation. Several serious problems have arisen by not requiring these essential elements of argumentation. Many debaters are not upholding their argumentative responsibilities by proving their own cases, but instead demand opponents prove their argument false. By explicitly excluding burdens of proof, the Lincoln-Douglas debate guidelines are actually promoting a form of the logical fallacy "Argumentum ad ignorantum." In other words, "the argument that I am making needs no proof; it is presumed correct until my opponent proves it wrong."
"The most common example of the 'Argumentum ad ignorantum' fallacy is when affimative L-D debaters claim that instead of the affirmative needing to prove the resolution true, it is the responsibility of negative to prove the resolution false. Use of this heinous tactic is the sigh of a poorly trained and coached L-D debater and continues to be a favorite maneuver employed by hate groups and demagogues. "
I see so many debates where one side will try to "ad hominem" the other side for not providing a proper justification or refusing to refute certain points. When it should be clear that marginal refutation is acceptable and the focus should be on providing adequate proof of your own position. I see voters on DDO using this maneuver quite often too. Often the focus of the votes are on the existence of refutation rather than on the provision of reasonable evidence that proves the resolution.
I also see a lot of debaters get trapped by this. Manipulators will say "you didn't rebut on my refutation, so my refutation must be true" when the refutation is clearly not the focus of the debate.