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

Favorite type of debate

funnybrad333
Posts: 221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2008 7:06:26 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
I was reading a couple comments on an LD debate on this site, and I saw a comment by LM saying:

Mock Trial>Congress>LD

That seemed a little harsh to me, as I think the order is more like this:

LD>Policy>Mock Trial (still do not fully understand what this is)>Parli>Congress>MUN

So my favorite is:
LINCOLN-DOUGLAS
What's yours?
If I didn't answer what you said, try bolding the important part.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2008 7:33:19 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Mock trial is where you have a fictional criminal case, each side consists of either prosecution or defense lawyers and witnesses, and they have to act out the trial. Key is knowledge of the relevant laws, ability to think on your feet, and convincing acting on the part of the witnesses (they have to look like they are telling the truth, and not say anything stupid :D). Both sides start with predetermined evidence. Did one last year in Law and American Society (I was a pretrial witness for the prosecution, so I had to argue mainly points of law on a motion about whether a given piece of evidence, obtained by a detective without a warrant from a public trash across state lines, was legally admissible. I won the motion, team lost the case though).

Personally, I prefer my debates raw and rules-free.
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.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2008 8:39:30 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Any debate that's geared towards truth and not theater is fine with me.

For starters, that excludes pretty much anything and everything done in forensics.
: 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?
funnybrad333
Posts: 221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2008 8:48:27 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
But without oral debate there is no skill.

Although I am going to my first tournament this saturday, I am glad that it is in person. This online debate scene is sickening. The fact that a plethora of knowledge is present at any given time is nice (internet), but it lowers the overall value of intelligence. I would like to see someone debate only with a case, and not be able to reference a source at any given time, often googling exactly what I wrote and finding a legitimate counter-argument.

Another skill detractor that goes along with what I just said is the time factor. There is absolutely no pressure. No actually constraining deadlines are present, either. The pressure of cross-examination is enough to make me defeat my opponents. I can make them "accidentally" agree with my ideals or disagree with their own, and then I can take that all the way until the end of the case. Also, without proper time constraints (you have 3 minutes to split over two speeches in LD, on here you have 3 days for each "speech") there is no intelligence factor. One can research in between rounds. A debate is supposed to be about readily accessing one's own knowledge.

The only justification for online debate is that it allows anyone to create a logically sound conclusive argument, that in the end should further the human race's beliefs.

But this "pure" debate seems no fun to me.
If I didn't answer what you said, try bolding the important part.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2008 9:22:06 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Oral debate is theater.
Theater is about entertaining people, not truth.

I give a s*** about truth.
I don't give a flying f*** about theater.

Non-oral debate doesn't require "no skill", it simply requires a different skill set.
I really could care less if I could defend my side sufficiently.
If I'm wrong about something, I'll admit it.
Not defend it.
: 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?
Dnick94
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 7:00:42 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Oral debate isn't fun because nervousness and stress doesn't show skill. Online debate is a better way to show skill and you can defend your case with references. If you are wrong, then you will simply conceded and people will judge depending on the skill of the debater.
"Intellectuals solve problems; geniuses prevent them."
-Albert Einstein
funnybrad333
Posts: 221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 8:27:23 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Although I may be biased, I believe wholeheartedly that online debate shows little to no skill in debate. The only skill it might show is the ability to organize and structure an argument. But even then, the fact that information is readily available, and that there are no time constraints makes online debate incredibly easy. I just went to my first tournament and had 4 rounds of LD debate. I would have to say that after the case, rebutting your opponent, and planning to do so in 1 minute with no evidence at hand, shows one's true ability to reason efficiently. After all, we should all agree to these purposes.

Discussion: Truth. A more casual event where two people try to find logical ends and avoid logical fallacies for the sake of knowledge.

Argument: Convince. Stubborn people trying to discuss.

Debate: Victory. Debate is more of a sport. Victory is valued over actual truth and knowledge.
If I didn't answer what you said, try bolding the important part.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2008 12:37:43 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
If you want to have some SKILL in an online debate, go debate politics in a chatroom... Find something you believe that almost no one in that chatroom will believe in. Defend it against all attackers, somehow typing fast enough to address everything, without saying something stupid :D
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.
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2008 12:56:36 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
I don't know about that. When I started doing oral debate, my initial problem was that I'd think up my counter arguments AS my opponent said them. The problem with this is that I wasn't as likely to listen to there whole speech. Bottom line though, the time limit wasn't the problem for me. 2 minutes is PLENTY of time to come up with some counter arguments based on the notes you take from your opponent's speech (and if you do your CX correctly, the 2 minute prep should be cake and may not even need the full 2 minutes). To go even further with your reasoning that less time equals more skill, why not simply outlaw prep time and force debaters to debate IMMEDIATELY after one another.

I'd also question just how much skill you actually use given how you've admitted to relying on pressuring opponents so that they may "ACCIDENTALLY" concede to one of your points during C/X. Such practice is not skill; such practice is the usage of parlor tricks.
funnybrad333
Posts: 221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2008 4:16:12 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Remaining calm under pressure is a much better sign of skill than writing an argument over a three day period with infinite resources available.
If I didn't answer what you said, try bolding the important part.
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2008 6:41:48 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/27/2008 4:16:12 PM, funnybrad333 wrote:
Remaining calm under pressure is a much better sign of skill than writing an argument over a three day period with infinite resources available.

Remaining calm (which has nothing to do with actually debating) is better sign of argumentation skill than creating an actual argument? Do explain. Of course, even a total knucklehead can remain calm while having absolutely no control over the debate. Remaining calm (in the context we're talking about) is a speaking skill, not a debate skill. Sure, it can be beneficial in a debate, but overall, it's not going to be what determines whether you win or lose.
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2008 6:45:00 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Actually, I take that back. Sadly, there are many who may end up voting off of red herrings such as getting nervous or who has the prettiest vocabulary rather than the actual argument (particularly laymen).
Dnick94
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2008 6:55:23 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Not being nervous is good. But it limits the potential that everyone has without stress. In oral debates, no one gets nervous and debates to their best of their ability without any stress.
"Intellectuals solve problems; geniuses prevent them."
-Albert Einstein
knick-knack
Posts: 125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2008 7:20:36 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
My favorite is Public-Forum because you don't have to deal with values like in LD and there is facts. Like, this is how it is, so deal with it.

You get to lay down the Smackdown.
And you get to have help in case you screw up.
John Hancock