[eDebate] Standards for Evidence (and quip to russell)

Kevin Sanchez let_the_american_empire_burn
Mon May 11 19:34:08 CDT 2009


http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2009-May/078695.html
_

those who've responded to this individual instance appear to have set
aside the more general pressing question asked in the original post:

"Is it legitimate for a[ny] coach to write articles which are clearly
relevant to the current debate topic?"

if not, why not?
...if so, does this hold true even if the work is specifically tailored to
be used as 'evidence' in a debate round?

{additionally, to grind my own axe: how is this problem worsened by the
traditional distinction between analytical and evidential argumentation?}

_

http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2009-May/078703.html

'cheating', mr. russell? - but i thought...

"There are no rules in debate. Yes, I'm saying that this rule and *any other
rule* on who can produce evidence before a debate round ought to be revoked."

: asterisk-emphasis mine,
http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2005-April/061594.html
{which was in reply to,
http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2005-April/061590.html
and to which i replied,
http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2005-April/061600.html }

;-)


K

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail? has a new way to see what's up with your friends.
http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/WhatsNew?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_WhatsNew1_052009
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090511/872497fb/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list