[eDebate] my Richmond updated judge philosophy -- please read

Paul Strait paulstrait
Fri Oct 12 03:25:54 CDT 2007

To be fair, I was actually trying to be 'offensive,' not 'defensive.' Perhaps I should have explicitly stated my belief that I thought you are committing theft and do not deserve to be compensated if you are universally struck.

Asha makes some good points though -- when dealing with a hostile audience, it is a rhetorically defensible strategy to simply choose to be a hostile audience back, rather than trying to communicate your ideas in a way that might be persuasive to them.  That is obviously the way good dialog works.  In real life, if someone doesn't like the way you are stating your point of view, under no circumstances should true students of human communication try to state their point of view in a different way; it is clearly better to simply refuse to listen to them back, to teach them the error of their ways.  

>Before I try to defend why this binary is bad, in my rounds at Richmond I'm going to role-play why this binary is good.

Seriously, a little less self-righteousness please.

Everyone should keep in mind that although this is a game, we should at least pretend that there is some connection to teaching young adults the strategies for thinking through life decisions and persuasively conveying the reasons behind those decisions to others, whether they are predisposed to agree or not.  

L. Paul Strait


Ph.D. Student,

Annenberg School for Communication

University of Southern California


Cell: 202-270-6397

Email: strait at usc.edu

Climb to the top of the charts!? Play Star Shuffle:? the word scramble challenge with star power.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20071012/50b66874/attachment.htm 

More information about the Mailman mailing list