Total Posts:160|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

How BoP works (in simple english)

Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:25:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
This is to clarify an apparent misconception about how BoP works that I've (very) recently stumbled across.

What is a BoP?

A burden of proof is basically an expectation for someone to back up a claim they've made.

When does a BoP exist?

This is the important part. A BoP exist when a claim is made against a status quo. Note the two claims:
1) My plant withered probably because aliens zapped it with an undetectable gamma ray beam.
2) My plant withered probably because I haven't watered it in a week.
Claim 2 does not have a BoP because it would be considered 'status quo,' whereas claim 1 does carry a BoP.

In science lingo, the BoP is always on the alternate hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis is the claim that asserts X caused the change, as opposed to Not X caused the change. The negation of the alternative hypothesis is called the null hypothesis and does not have a BoP

"There is a God" -Alternative hypothesis: Has a BoP
"There is no God" -Null hypothesis: Does not have a BoP

When does a BoP not exist?

A BoP does not exist in a debate when:
> A claim is not being made
> There is no resolution
> The BoP is shared

When is BoP shared?


BoP is always shared when the topic is not directional.
"We should invest in space technology" has a BoP for Pro.
"Should we invest in space technology?" has a shared BoP

Examples of directional topics:
"Dogs are better than cats"
"Global warming is real"
"People should pay less tax"

Examples of non directional topics:
"Legalized marijuana."
"Is Islam a religion of peace?"
"Closing the tap while you are brushing your teeth"

Note that when a BoP is shared, it doesn't actually exist. BoP is a onus on one person, so when both parties have it, you don't need to talk about BoP as being on both parties because it's technically not a correct statement.

Extra question:


I'm a magician, with a black and white rabbit. I randomly put one into a hat and ask you to guess what colour rabbit is in the hat.
You claim: "There is a white rabbit in the hat"
Your friend claims "There is a black rabbit in the hat"

Is there a BoP and if so, who has it?

Current relevance:

I noticed this after being pinged by Zarro who entered a debate where Pro wasn't using a topic that gives him a BoP. http://www.debate.org...

For such topics, be aware especially if you're new to the site, that winning by default is not a thing unless the opponent forfeits or doesn't present any material. If you start a debate on a topic and give a reason as to why you believe the topic is true, that's good enough. You don't automatically lose the debate if your one argument was faulty and it's a topic that didn't require you to prove something. Con will need to support their side of the argument as well.

If you do have a BoP then it's enough for Con to simply refute what you are saying and you will lose if they are more compelling.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:33:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:32:55 AM, YYW wrote:
This is about 800% right. Corrections will follow.

f'xed
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:33:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:33:33 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:32:55 AM, YYW wrote:
This is about 80% right. Corrections will follow.

f'xed
Zarroette
Posts: 4,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:38:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:25:52 AM, Smithereens wrote:
"There is no God" -Null hypothesis: Does not have a BoP

This here demonstrates that you're either dishonest, or that you don't know what you're talking about.

"There is no God" is a claim, therefore it has a BoP. Any claim has a BoP. You're committing a negative proof fallacy.

This is so simple; I am baffled that someone like you would either be so stupid/trollish to try to get this bs across.
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:42:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:38:00 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:25:52 AM, Smithereens wrote:
"There is no God" -Null hypothesis: Does not have a BoP

This here demonstrates that you're either dishonest, or that you don't know what you're talking about.

"There is no God" is a claim, therefore it has a BoP. Any claim has a BoP. You're committing a negative proof fallacy.

This is so simple; I am baffled that someone like you would either be so stupid/trollish to try to get this bs across.

The answer to your question is philosophical. You don't put BoP on universal negatives regardless of whether or not they can be proven because they are null hypothesis claim. They don't assert change to status quo.

"There are no magical unicorns" Is true until proven false

"The defendant is innocent" Is true until proven false.

"There are no gods" Is true until proven false.

To believe in anything else doesn't work because then you could equate claims such as "Russel's flying teapot is real" with "Russels flying teapot isn't real." That's logically incoherent, and this is a reductio ad absurdum so please recognise that.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:43:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:33:50 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:33:33 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:32:55 AM, YYW wrote:
This is about 80% right. Corrections will follow.

f'xed

will look forward to your insights.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
Zarroette
Posts: 4,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:47:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:42:54 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:38:00 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:25:52 AM, Smithereens wrote:
"There is no God" -Null hypothesis: Does not have a BoP

This here demonstrates that you're either dishonest, or that you don't know what you're talking about.

"There is no God" is a claim, therefore it has a BoP. Any claim has a BoP. You're committing a negative proof fallacy.

This is so simple; I am baffled that someone like you would either be so stupid/trollish to try to get this bs across.

The answer to your question is philosophical. You don't put BoP on universal negatives regardless of whether or not they can be proven because they are null hypothesis claim. They don't assert change to status quo.

"There are no magical unicorns" Is true until proven false

"The defendant is innocent" Is true until proven false.

"There are no gods" Is true until proven false.

To believe in anything else doesn't work because then you could equate claims such as "Russel's flying teapot is real" with "Russels flying teapot isn't real." That's logically incoherent, and this is a reductio ad absurdum so please recognise that.

No, you stupid idiot.

They are *neither* true or false, until proven either way.

Wow, this is worse than Vaarka's retardation.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:52:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:25:52 AM, Smithereens wrote:
This is to clarify an apparent misconception about how BoP works that I've (very) recently stumbled across.

What is a BoP?

A burden of proof is basically an expectation for someone to back up a claim they've made.

Corect, more or less.

When does a BoP exist?

This is the important part. A BoP exist when a claim is made against a status quo. Note the two claims:
1) My plant withered probably because aliens zapped it with an undetectable gamma ray beam.
2) My plant withered probably because I haven't watered it in a week.
Claim 2 does not have a BoP because it would be considered 'status quo,' whereas claim 1 does carry a BoP.

This is almost right. You're very close. But, it's not the "status quo" that is challenged which establishes the burden of proof. This is different from, say, scientific consensus on any particular subject. If the status quo in science is X, then the claim of "x is wrong" is the claim that always bears the burden of proof because X is assumed to be true in that case.

In debate, X is not assumed to be true whether or not there is scientific consensus; and more broadly, in debate, X might not even be the kind of claim that could be shown to be true in any objective sense. For example, "the sun rises in the east" is an empirically true statement because we can observe the sun and measure the direction in which it rises relative to the world.

But, the claim "sunny weather is better than rainy weather" is neither true nor false because the quality of "betterness" is what is at issue, and "betterness" cannot be objectively defined. What is "better" is subjective, and reliant on value judgements to ascertain what counts for "that which is better" than anything else. Some people may prefer sun; others rain, neither is objectively better or worse.

In science lingo, the BoP is always on the alternate hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis is the claim that asserts X caused the change, as opposed to Not X caused the change. The negation of the alternative hypothesis is called the null hypothesis and does not have a BoP.

This is on the right track in the context of debate, but not quite there for reasons I'm going to say below.

There are two kinds of claims that can be debated in resolutions.

The first kind of claim is a positive claim, which is a claim about the world that is objectively true or false. This is a "scientific" type of claim; all scientific claims are positive claims, for example. Most often, these are not good subjects for debates because the burden of proof in that case falls only on one side. An example of a positive claim is "the sun rises in the east".

There, PRO has to bear the burden because PRO is making the claim about the world. CON isn't making a claim about the world. Positive resolutions having the sole BOP means that in the example above, PRO has the sole burden to prove that the sun rises in the east. CON may therefore win by default if PRO does not prove this claim up with competent evidence. Yet, the status quo presumes that the sun rises in the east because this is common knowledge. Nevertheless, because PRO asserts the claim PRO bears its burden and CON does not. Debate does not make assumptions about what the status quo is on any kind of resolution. This means that resolutions where people make claims about the world are fairly debated according to the objective standards of proof that make claims about the world meaningful and able to stand up to scrutiny.

The second kind of resolution is a normative one. Normative claims are claims that are not positive claims. These are the opposite of science-type claims because while objective facts may inform value judgements -- and they should -- value judgments are required in order to make the call. For example, the claim "cats are better than dogs" is not a type of question science can answer because science can't tell us anything about whether anything is better than anything else. The quality of being better is subjective, not objective.

So, in the case of any normative resolution, the burden of proof is shared. A shared BOP in the context of the resolution "cats are better than dogs" means that PRO has to argue that cats are better than dogs, but CON has to argue that cats are NOT better than dogs. So, dogs can be just as good as cats or better for CON to win. The reason the burdens fall this way is because to place the BOP on PRO only is to assume that cats are NOT better than dogs, and therefore unfairly bias the debate in CON's favor. The opposite is also true. The BOP cannot fall only on CON would be to to bias the debate in PRO's favor. That means that a shared BOP ensures that normative resolutions are fairly debated.
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:52:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:47:11 AM, Zarroette wrote:
No, you stupid idiot.

They are *neither* true or false, until proven either way.

Wow, this is worse than Vaarka's retardation.

Either Russel's teapot exists, or it doesn't exist. This is philosophy, not quantum mechanics. The law you're dealing with is called excluded middle.

The claim 'there is no God' has no BoP because if you don't believe in God, you believe that the claim is true. Not believing in God does not mandate you to prove that your unbelief is justified.

Epistemic weak claims such as 'I don't know if God exist' is not a negating pair to 'There is no God,' because either god(s) exist or they don't.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:56:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:52:00 AM, YYW wrote:
I actually agree with you there, especially the last part because that's how IRL debates are run, but to be generous I'd make the allowance to Zarro that BoP is more vigorously applied here.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 2:58:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:47:11 AM, Zarroette wrote:
No, you stupid idiot.

They are *neither* true or false, until proven either way.

Wow, this is worse than Vaarka's retardation.

Actually I just noticed that you agreed with the defined conditions for 'shared' BoP, which your debate was one of.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:07:01 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Ok, now the rest of it:

"There is a God" -Alternative hypothesis: Has a BoP
"There is no God" -Null hypothesis: Does not have a BoP

The above resolutions are not making claims about the world, but about something over and above the world... God. This is a weird topic, but the reason the debate is normative is because of how the burdens shake out in order for the debate to be fair to both parties. It's a given that both topics require proof that God exists. The problem is that religious existence isn't something that can be measured or proven or disproven by science. Science's limit respects the physical world. That is to say, science is the only meaningful way to make empirical claims about the world; but science can't tell us about anything other than the physical world. God, on the other hand, is by definition metaphysical. So, that subject is out of science's reach, with the implication that it's a normative issue by default. Thus, the BOP is shared no matter what.

When does a BoP not exist?

A BoP does not exist in a debate when:
> A claim is not being made
> There is no resolution
> The BoP is shared

When is BoP shared?


This isn't correct... well, it's almost correct, but we'll explore how.

BoP is always shared when the topic is not directional.
"We should invest in space technology" has a BoP for Pro.
"Should we invest in space technology?" has a shared BoP

No. Both have a shared BOP. There is no such thing as a "directional" resolution. The issue in both resolutions as you have phrased them is the same. The issue is whether we should invest in space technology. Word order and the presence or absence of a question mark -- i.e., the sole difference between those two sentences -- does not alter what the issue is.

What matters about what you have there is the word "should". That word is a clue that we're not dealing with a claim about the world, but a claim about what "we" (i.e., people in the world) ought to be doing. Here, we're debating whether we ought to invest in space technology. Great. So, that means that PRO has to argue that we SHOULD invest in space technology in order to uphold his burden of proof. But, on the other hand, CON has to argue that we SHOULD NOT invest in space technology in order to uphold his burden. That evenly distributes the burden and ensures fairness to both debaters.

Examples of directional topics:
"Dogs are better than cats"
"Global warming is real"
"People should pay less tax"

No. This is totally wrong, and illustrates the nonsense of this concept of "directional" topics.

The first topic "dogs are better than cats" is normative for reasons I've already said. It is not a claim about the world, but a value judgment about the relative "betterness" of dogs and cats. The third topic is like the first topic in that it involves value judgements about the amount of taxes people should pay. So, both of these deal with SHOULD or OUGHT questions and not questions of what is objectively true, the case, or empirically so.

The second topic is TOTALLY different. The second topic is "Global warming is real", and that is a science question by definition. This is the kind of question for which proof MUST be available in order for the claim to be true and have meaning. So, in this case, PRO has to prove that global warming is real. That should be not very hard to do, given that there is vast scientific consensus on the subject; but, the fact that there is scientific consensus on the subject doesn't mean that PRO gets to ride on their coat tails. PRO has to make the case to meet the BOP. There, CON has no BOP, and to win need only prevent PRO from meeting his, or for PRO to fail to meet his by default.

Examples of non directional topics:
"Legalized marijuana."
"Is Islam a religion of peace?"
"Closing the tap while you are brushing your teeth"

Here, you're dealing with normative questions because none of these deal with empirical claims. The "Islam is a religion of peace" question might look like it's an empirical claim about the world, but that would be little more than a temptation because the quality of being "a religion of peace" is not something that can be scientifically or empirically proven or disproven. So, in all of these cases, the BOP would be shared.

In the first case, PRO must argue that weed should be legalized whereas CON must argue that it should NOT be legalized. In the second case, PRO must argue that Is Islam a religion of peace; whereas CON must argue that Islam is NOT a religion of peace. In the third case PRO must argue for closing the tap while you are brushing your teeth; while CON must argue against closing the tap while you are brushing your teeth.
Leaning
Posts: 2,552
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:15:01 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I found this mostly helpful. Some of it seems to be turning complex, but mostly helpful. Mainly for making me think more on how I would phrase a debate topic.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:15:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:42:54 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:38:00 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:25:52 AM, Smithereens wrote:
"There is no God" -Null hypothesis: Does not have a BoP

This here demonstrates that you're either dishonest, or that you don't know what you're talking about.

"There is no God" is a claim, therefore it has a BoP. Any claim has a BoP. You're committing a negative proof fallacy.

This is so simple; I am baffled that someone like you would either be so stupid/trollish to try to get this bs across.

The answer to your question is philosophical. You don't put BoP on universal negatives regardless of whether or not they can be proven because they are null hypothesis claim. They don't assert change to status quo.

"There are no magical unicorns" Is true until proven false

Positive. We could search the world in all its areas for magical unicorns; finding none, could safely conclude they do not exist. BOP there falls only on PRO, which should be easy to win.

"The defendant is innocent" Is true until proven false.

No. This is a burden of proof as it relates to trial, which is different than debate although the structures are similar in form. Innocence until proven guilty is a presumption that we as a society establish to protect the rights of the accused. But, what the defendant did or did not do is a true or false question, even though proving what is true or false may be more or less challenging. FourTrouble got mixed up in conflating trial burdens with debate burdens. I suggest avoiding this path, because it's a mistake to go down it. Debate does not have similar presumptions.

"There are no gods" Is true until proven false.

No. This is normative, and the burdens of proof are shared for reasons I've already said.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:16:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:15:01 AM, Leaning wrote:
I found this mostly helpful. Some of it seems to be turning complex, but mostly helpful. Mainly for making me think more on how I would phrase a debate topic.

Just read what I wrote. It simplifies things. There is no such thing as a directional resolution. Feel free to ask questions.
SamStevens
Posts: 5,522
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:16:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:15:01 AM, Leaning wrote:
I found this mostly helpful. Some of it seems to be turning complex, but mostly helpful. Mainly for making me think more on how I would phrase a debate topic.

I agree. YYW's posts provided clarity regarding this. Although it's a lot to digest, it's pretty helpful.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:24:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
http://www.debate.org...

This is the second page of my debate guide, which I include here for people's reference.

The difference between burdens of proof at trial and burdens in debate is something that I have written about in the past.

Tej's posts in my thead correctly distinguish between positive and normative resolutions as well, and if people have difficulty understanding that difference, his post are good supplemental reading material.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:37:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:35:08 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:24:59 AM, YYW wrote:

Can a resolution have zero burdens?

No
Varrack
Posts: 2,688
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:40:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:37:43 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:35:08 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:24:59 AM, YYW wrote:

Can a resolution have zero burdens?

No

I asked because the DDO wikia page on burdens of proof alleges they can (http://ddo.wikia.com...)

I didn't think it was accurate, though.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:42:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:40:21 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:37:43 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:35:08 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:24:59 AM, YYW wrote:

Can a resolution have zero burdens?

No

I asked because the DDO wikia page on burdens of proof alleges they can (http://ddo.wikia.com...)

I didn't think it was accurate, though.

idk what idiot wrote that but they were wrong
Leaning
Posts: 2,552
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:48:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Caveman gives up on understanding. Decides to vote less and when making debates to sidestep problem. No worries, I am happy with my solution.
Varrack
Posts: 2,688
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:53:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 2:56:35 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:52:00 AM, YYW wrote:
I actually agree with you there, especially the last part because that's how IRL debates are run, but to be generous I'd make the allowance to Zarro that BoP is more vigorously applied here.

Yeah, there isn't anything wrong with judges having discretion to decide who holds the BoP in low quality debates where the BoP isn't stated.
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:54:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:16:37 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:15:01 AM, Leaning wrote:
I found this mostly helpful. Some of it seems to be turning complex, but mostly helpful. Mainly for making me think more on how I would phrase a debate topic.

Just read what I wrote. It simplifies things. There is no such thing as a directional resolution. Feel free to ask questions.

Directional is a term used in science describing hypothesis testing. It's a good word because in science methodology, a directional hypothesis requires a standard of proof that can be objectively measured and compared to an alpha that determines if it's accepted. A directional hypothesis and and a directional resolution are exactly the same thing, in two different contexts.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:56:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:40:21 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:37:43 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:35:08 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:24:59 AM, YYW wrote:

Can a resolution have zero burdens?

No

I asked because the DDO wikia page on burdens of proof alleges they can (http://ddo.wikia.com...)

I didn't think it was accurate, though.

No it's correct. That's literally how BoP works in philosophy.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
Smithereens
Posts: 8,358
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:57:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:37:43 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:35:08 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:24:59 AM, YYW wrote:

Can a resolution have zero burdens?

No

If BoP is shared, there is no BoP. A burden of Proof is a onus on one party to prove a claim.
"Your signature should not have the name of other players in the game, nor should it have the words VTL, Vote, or Unvote."
~Yraelz, 2017

Debate challenge 'Solipsism is false:' http://www.debate.org...
If God were real... http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:57:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:53:56 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:56:35 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 3/22/2018 2:52:00 AM, YYW wrote:
I actually agree with you there, especially the last part because that's how IRL debates are run, but to be generous I'd make the allowance to Zarro that BoP is more vigorously applied here.

Yeah, there isn't anything wrong with judges having discretion to decide who holds the BoP in low quality debates where the BoP isn't stated.

Judges have no discretion on BOP. The resolution defines the BOP.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:58:26 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:57:40 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:37:43 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:35:08 AM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:24:59 AM, YYW wrote:

Can a resolution have zero burdens?

No

If BoP is shared, there is no BoP. A burden of Proof is a onus on one party to prove a claim.

That is semantically wrong; functionally inconsequential.

The DDO Wiki is wrong.
YYW
Posts: 44,679
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2018 3:59:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/22/2018 3:54:53 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:16:37 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/22/2018 3:15:01 AM, Leaning wrote:
I found this mostly helpful. Some of it seems to be turning complex, but mostly helpful. Mainly for making me think more on how I would phrase a debate topic.

Just read what I wrote. It simplifies things. There is no such thing as a directional resolution. Feel free to ask questions.

Directional is a term used in science describing hypothesis testing.

Hypothesis is not a resolution. That is the point.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.