Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

How to judge a debate

1Devilsadvocate
Posts: 1,518
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2012 1:10:53 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
If neither side makes any arguments.
but pro has BOP.
Should MCA go to con?
I cannot write in English, because of the treacherous spelling. When I am reading, I only hear it and am unable to remember what the written word looks like."
"Albert Einstein

http://www.twainquotes.com... , http://thewritecorner.wordpress.com... , http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com...
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2012 12:49:36 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/27/2012 1:10:53 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
If neither side makes any arguments.
but pro has BOP.
Should MCA go to con?

I would say no. If neither side makes any arguments, I don't give arguments to anyone (and I express my disappointment toward the debate in the comments section of the vote). If no one bothers to make any arguments, then probably neither person has any business debating in the first place.
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2012 12:50:23 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 12/27/2012 1:10:53 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
If neither side makes any arguments.
but pro has BOP.
Should MCA go to con?

I would say yes if there was any explicit acceptance of BOP. Otherwise, who cares.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,509
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2012 11:41:04 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
If Pro instigates the debate and makes no arguments, I think he loses both arguments and conduct, even if Con also makes no arguments. Pro has the burden of proof, and if he makes no arguments there is nothing for Con to refute. Pro loses conduct for fail to debate the resolution. The "house," i.e., the audience of readers, cannot affirm a resolution that was not debated.

This theoretical situation has probably ever happened. Pro usually at least gives his opinion that the resolution should be affirmed. That's extremely weak grounds, but it is something.

There have been debates here where Pro was completely incoherent, which ens up as the same thing. It's also happened that Con decided to argue a different subject than the resolution.

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