[eDebate] [CEDA-L] The costs of a game, part 1: An unethical,
helwich at macalester.edu
Fri Nov 16 23:50:05 CST 2007
If Louisville's arguments are about method, and the negative is structurally required (or incentivized) to dispute the affirmative, how could any debate with Louisville _not_ be about method?
Other than that, this reminds me of Gorgias. Perhaps Ede is Plato/Socrates in disguise (although certainly smarter and of finer metal).
In jest (sorta),
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Ede Warner" <ewarner at louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: [eDebate] [CEDA-L] The costs of a game, part 1: An unethical,
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:44:26 -0500
More information about the Mailman