[eDebate] Purpose of Debate and Topic!

[Ryan Poirier]

>Should the resolutions allow our community to explore alternative mechanisms for addressing >problems in the policy making community? If the resolution starts out with forcing us into one >ideological view, the resolution does not serve as a place to explore possible solutions to >real-world problems. Is this where the education for policy-making occurs? If so, then we >need to not blueprint the plan text in the resolution. 

But the point of having "ideological" topics is to see things from a different angle. Are you as close minded as to think that the other side of the isle doesn't have a single vantage point in which they might be 10% correct? Also it creates better policy makers when they can view an issue through different glasses. I think that is the educational point between having a NEGATIVE and AFFIRMATIVE side of the resolution.
>What about negative ground? I do not think that we should construct resolutions for the sole >purpose of protecting negative ground. I think that you should negate what the aff says, and >their ideas, not what the resolution states. Yes, limiting the area we discuss is an option, but >it does not of have to occur at the expense trapping the affirmative so the negative can know >what they have to say. This is not skeet shooting. It seems like we are caging the affirmative >to make the hunt fair. 

Shouldn't the Affirmative side say what the resolution is? Their ideas should run parallel with the resolution at least, thus negating the resolution would earn you some ground on negating what the aff says, if not the entirety. Why are you worried about generic negative ground? On the affirmative side, you should be ready for it, it should be impotent to you.
 
>I have had many arguments on edebate about these issues, and I constantly contend that >the overlimiting resolutions take the "critical" out of "critical thinking". 
 
I contend that the critical thinking occurs not only in the advantages you pick but in the actual debate round when good debates happen. I know you take great pleasure in blowing a team out of the water (i have been on the bad side of those debates), but the most critical thinking occurs when the pressure is on and it's a close round.


		
---------------------------------
Discover Yahoo!
 Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news & more. Check it out!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20050601/e413747b/attachment.htm