6 ms·
I debated in High School and College. I don't think you're giving competitive policy debate a fair treatment here. On the surface it seems stupid to think that
by nbashaw 15y ago
I debated in High School and College. I don't think you're giving competitive policy debate a fair treatment here.
On the surface it seems stupid to think that an un-refuted argument should be considered true. But arguments are evaluated that way in policy debates for a very specific reason -- the purpose of debate is not to discover the truth, it is to win an argument. That's the whole point of the activity. If you don't like it, you don't have to play.
That's actually the reason I quit during my sophomore year, but it doesn't make debate a worthless activity. Nothing taught me to work harder or think faster.
Debate is like working out. It's not real, so certain considerations go out the window. Under your logic, running on a treadmill is a bad idea because you're not actually going anywhere. But the point of debate isn't to discover the truth, it's to sharpen your understanding and wit.
Where debate goes wrong is when you stay in it too long. After a certain point the skills become harder and harder to transfer to other parts of your life. And a lot of the people in it, as you might be able to imagine, are pretty arrogant know-it-alls.
After I left debate, I had to re-socialize myself back into the world of normal people who don't argue with each other all day for fun. It sounds like I'm exaggerating, but all my friends were debaters and all my time was spent researching, debating, or arguing with them about literally everything. That's just how debaters tend to spend their free time.
- alnayyir 15y agoSo your friends were master debaters?
- enneff 15y ago> Under your logic, running on a treadmill is a bad idea because you're not actually going anywhere. I find this style of debating tedious in the same way. Why run on a treadmill when you can run outside?
- jfoutz 15y ago1. It's raining 2. It's cold 3. Poor air quality 4. Running surfaces are all paved 5. Lack of water 6. High temperature 7. UV exposure 8. Desire to watch a movie much higher than desire to exercise. 9. Required proximity to person, for example taking care of a sick loved one. 10. Uncertainty about the amount of time available to run
- nostrademons 15y agoMove to the Bay Area. ;-)
- btilly 15y agoKids in highschool usually don't have that choice.
- enneff 15y agoA bunch of excuses but no really good reasons. Besides, my question was a rhetorical response to a metaphorical device.
- saurik 15y agoOne might even say, it was a statement whose goal was to win an argument, and not to uncover underlying truth? ;P
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- derleth 15y ago> A bunch of excuses but no really good reasons. How do you distinguish between an 'excuse' and a 'reason'? It seems the terms are near-synonyms, only distinguishable to the extent one is an insult.
- nbashaw 15y agoRunning outside is the same, at the end of the day you return to the same place you started. The point isn't to get somewhere fast, it's just to run. We do it because we want to be healthy and athletic people. In the same way, you join debate not to get at the truth, but to increase your mental abilities.
- enneff 15y agoI guess what I mean is: why not use your energies to produce something of value, instead?
- joesb 15y agoRunning outside doesn't produce something of value, so I guess you are shifting your position. Running gives you better health, so if you value your health then running, even on treadmill, already gives you something of values.
- icegreentea 15y agoSo you can get better at creating things of value later?
- nbashaw 15y agoYou have a good point here - why not just learn to understand and articulate arguments by doing something productive for the world rather than competing against one another in pointless weekend tournaments? It makes no sense to compare debate to radically different activities (like programming or starting a startup). I'm not arguing that debate was the best thing that anyone can do, rather that it's a worthwhile and not totally bullshit activity. I understand if you don't want to do it (different strokes for different folks) but I gained a lot from it and I think it deserves a certain amount of respect. I would never disparage a tennis player for having wasted his time just because I find it tedious running back and forth. I would respect him and want to learn about tennis from him.
- argv_empty 15y agothe purpose of debate is not to discover the truth, it is to win an argument. … If you don't like it, you don't have to play. This isn't a particularly good defense if the opposition to this sort of thing is that it teaches students to favor winning arguments over being right (meaning everyone who didn't participate still has to live in a culture built on that preference).
- nbashaw 15y agoEveryone in debate knows they're just there to win rounds. People often argue ridiculous things (e.g. "your plan to explore space should be rejected because it reifies western colonialism") just for a kick. If you asked them whether they believe what they say, I predict 90% would say "no, not really". After a while, it gets boring. That's why I quit. But the activity actually gave me a great appreciation for the limits of my knowledge and the relationship of words to truth. Once you realize that a good argument can be made for almost anything, you start questioning the default rationalizations we all grow up with.