AND/OR is an abomination of the English language
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
TLJAB
| Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
| Started: | 12/4/2018 | Category: | Education | ||
| Updated: | 3 years ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
| Viewed: | 565 times | Debate No: | 119309 | ||
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)
 Pro Use of AND/OR is evidence of mental laziness. 'Gee, I don't want to make the effort to decide whether I should use "and" or "or. " Instead, I'll cover all the bases and use AND/OR. ' In many cases, The use of AND/OR adds confusion. The definition of the term is not the sum of "and" and "or. " ~if you were watching, You noticed that I have always chosen "and" or "or" instead of the abomination~  Con |
 |
|
Pro My friend asks, "Please, Wash the car and do the dishes. " Does he thank me if I only do one? -Yes. Chocolate and vanilla? -Just chocolate, Please. AND/OR is often redundant to AND, Too. Worse, AND/OR is an invasive species--it is never wrong! A rewrite of your final sentence, "you can wash either the car AND/OR the dishes, AND/OR you can do both" allows your original meaning. "We buy/sell x, Y, Z, AND/OR q. " Should be "and". AND/OR is not "important. " English thrived for centuries without it. Con To your wife analogy, Let's say she yells, "Wash the car and do the dishes. " In such a scenario, Where she just uses AND, It's thought that you have to do both, But if she used AND/OR and meant you could do both or either, Her statement would have been clarified. The same with the chocolate analogy: "Chocolate or Vanilla, " in context, Can imply you can only have one or the other, But "Chocolate and/or Vanilla" gives clarification that you could have both. And/or is important in logical clarification |
 |
|
Pro If you are set on having a "logical clarification, " you should pick a real word. English has compound & hyphenated words, But not slashed words. Here are successively better versions of the abomination (& they obey all the rules of grammar): AND-OR, Hyphenated words exist ANDOR, Save a character, Slash/hyphen not needed ORAND, Better no? RAND, Better still & save a character /, Save 3 more characters by just slash-ing all the options and the best option is. . . ", ". Slashes are ugly so just use comma separated lists. I call it the Red Fox Comma Con You say we should "pick a real word, " and then proceed to list several words I've never seen before, Some of which make no sense ("RAND"? ). If you were to use "RAND" in an essay, No one would understand what you meant. Same with all the others except "AND-OR, " which is actually used, Rarely, In some writings. Finally, I don't know what your definition of a "real word" is, But AND/OR is generally and used widely in many writings. It is important in logical clarification, And there is no concise and understandable alternative to the conjunction, And therefore AND/OR is not an abomination. |
 |
Post a Comment
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by TheUnexaminedLife 3 years ago
Report this Comment
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Behold 3 years ago
| Red_Fox | TLJAB | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - |  | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 5 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never qualifies what constitutes an abomination, but only makes general potshots at and/or., admits it is useful in round 3. The general purpose of language is to communicate meaning, if it is useful for that, it probably follows that it isn't whatever an 'abomination' is.
