Throughout high school and college, I was involved in competitive speech and debate. My first job after college was as a high school debate coach. Skillful debate requires logic, research, and critical thinking. I think it should be a required subject in schools.
In a debate class, as in law school, students are required to be able to argue both sides of an issue. I remember a year when the national debate topic was nuclear weapons. I got pretty good at arguing against disarmament treaties to limit the number of warheads in the world.
Did I believe governments should ignore the horrific dangers involved in stockpiling nukes? Not for a minute. But regardless if we debated on the affirmative or negative side, debate was just a game. We were arguing for points, not power.
The danger is that people who get good at debate can forget the critical difference between winning and being right—both factually and morally.
Persuasion—making others believe what you’re saying—is an essential skill in debate. It requires appealing to the emotions, as well as the intellect, of the audience. Like any tool, it can be used for different purposes. You can use a hammer to pound a nail—or to hit someone in the head.
As citizens of a participatory, democratic government, we are morally obliged to look beyond the arguments—no matter how logical or persuasive—to see what their effects may be in the real world.
And what yardstick should we use to measure those effects? There can be no other than the impact of policies—the real-world results of successful debating—on individual human beings and the other living organisms that share our planet.
Looking at the impacts of arguments is not part of being a good debater. It’s part of being a compassionate, responsible human being.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
I think that you are right we need to look at the impacts of the issues that we argue about in debates. We need to look at these debates on a more personal level than with just the idea in mind that we need to get the most points possible to win.
Pg. # 1
Michael Enos
Argument & Debate
The Limits of Debate
February 4, 2011
The Limits of Debate
I agree completely. It is very important to observe both sides of an argument not only to be factually correct, but morally as well. Developing skillful debate requires logic, research and critical thinking. However, a negative side of a debate isn't necessarily correct. Persuasion can be afflicted to your opponent, in order to connect emotionally and intellectually with the audience. Visualizing the consequences of an after effect is extremely important when trying to surpass the BS and persuasion on the particular matt3r of discussion. For the most part argument and debate can be an essential for narrowing down and developing solutions and alternatives so the decision made is not only factually correct, but morally as well so you can be comfortable with your final decision. That’s why you must use logic and attain research so that you can visualize beyond the positive attributes of a situation and at the potential negative outcome that may reside in the future of a final decision. Just because a solution may promote positive attributes for the short run doesn’t necessarily mean that the affect will remain the same in the long run. Overall, there are many variables encountered in regards to a debate, therefore precise and accurate data puts a limit on the negative ratio of persuasion used to connect emotionally with the target market. Looking at the micro- perspective and putting the pieces together for the marco- perspective will allow you to visualize the topic as whole for a greater understanding. In conclusion, being morally correct will enable you to make informed decisions on future topics with the satisfaction of the group as whole not on an individual level……
In most structures of debate you have fifteen minutes to prepare your entire speech, therefore making a significant portion of your speech spontaneous. If you don’t have enough time to prepare your entire speech, you undoubtedly don’t have enough time to stop and ponder the impacts that the point you’re defending would have. I see this as a positive thing for the debater, because if you did have enough time to consider the impacts, you may have a revelation and no longer agree with your argument. As stated in the article, you don’t necessarily agree with the side that you have been appointed, because that’s just it, you have been APPOINTED to that side. But I’m sure we can all agree that it’s easier to convince someone of something when we feel passionate about it, rather than pretending to feel passionate about it. Then again, I guess that’s what makes an excellent debater, one who can seem 100% confident and passionate about something when in reality they’re not.
I agree with the statement that the subject of debate should be a required subject in schools. Debate not only teaches you how to successfully win an argument, but how to win by not attacking another person’s character. The point of a debate is to win over the audience with thoughtful and intelligent comments. Not by degrading your opponents with hurtful words. Another important part of debate is the overall impact. Does your audience walk away really engaged and thinking about the points you made? Or do they focus on how you attacked the other debaters while trying to prove your point? By teaching debate in school, I believe it can teach students how to remain calm, focus on the argument at hand, and walk away with a mutual understanding of each other’s side. Rather than have things escalade, get nowhere, and have everyone be more upset then when they started. Also it can help teach both parties how to leave their emotions out of the argument.
Hi, Mike and Tyler!
It's so nice to find readers who are as interested in this subject as I am! Thanks for your insightful comments.
Mike, for some reason your comment posted three times, so I just deleted the redundancy.
Hi, Kelly and Samantha! Thanks for bringing up some good observations on this important topic. As you see, you've inspired me to pursue the subject a little further.
As important as the art of persuasion may be, I think it's even more important to teach people how not to be persuaded by fallacious or dishonest arguments.
Debate is an amazing tool to get people to really consider what they believe about important issues, and I agree that there is a huge difference between winning an argument and being right. I also think that looking at the impact of an argument is part of being a good debater, because in a debate, you're trying to show that what you propose in your argument will have the best effect/impact on the world. If you're able to show the positive impact your argument will have, then it can help convince others to agree with you. But I also agree that looking at the effect is a definitely a part of being compassionate and concerned about what's morally right.
The Limits of Debate
Samantha L.
Feb. 6, 2011
I also agree with everyone that, the subject of debate should be a required course. The art of debate teaches the differences between arguing and fighting, which differ in many ways. I feel as if students at schools took course in debate they would start to learn how to discuss a problem rather than use their fists or verbally abuse someone. In a fight each disputant tries to win, it never persuades and it only tries to dominate the enemy. In an argument you are trying to win over your audience or to have your opponent come to an agreement. I totally agree with Samantha's post because not only do we see more problems with students today and how they respond we also see more fighting then settling for a common ground or agreement. Not only do we see this as a problem with students ,but it can also determine a nations ultimate fate. Years after 9/11 we still have critics asking the question whether or not it was right of us to go in with heavy weapons to Iraq and Afghanistan.We went in to another country with a "lets kick some A**," momentum, instead of discussing the situation and acknowledging the potential outcome of our entire Nation. (soldiers killed, innocent people killed, economy is down, and overall moral is down.) So as elders it is our responsibility now to teach the youth of our mistakes and to correct them for they are the fate of our future with our nation.
Debate is something that is sadly becoming a lost art, in my personal opinion. The mainstream reference for the term “debate” usually is implied with political implications. The Presidential Debate, for example is one of the only times when mass amounts of Americans are even exposed to a debate of any sort. I agree that debate should be a required class in both levels of education, being general and higher. One should be able to present their case on a given topic and also have the ability to discuss the topic in an academic and educated manner.
When this art of debating is lost in the future people will no longer defend their argument they will just attack the opposition’s. This will lead to more harm than good because debate will be completely replaced with the emotionally charged fights that are offspring of a disagreement. Debate is a cornerstone in civilization and must be kept in curriculum in the educational system.
Dominique Seramy
Argument & Debate
This article was great. As far as I am aware most high schools don’t offer debate club and as mentioned should be available to students. I think it should even be offered in middle school as an elective so that people can be introduced sooner to help gain a better prospective on the subject. I like how the author of the article states “debate is just a game”. This implies that it should be an enjoyable strategic conversation between people rather than a serious argument that could cause some tension. I found that the article implies that debate should be persuasive in a way through emotions as well as techniques rather than through whether or not you really believe your side is right. And in the end the article is summed up perfectly with the word compassionate. In my opinion if I were a judge I would be seduced by the compassion of a debater and how he or she lured me into believing their side of the debate.
First off, congrats on getting a job as a debate coach coming directly out of college. I strongly agree that debate class should be a required subject in schools. Having a debate class would be prime for young adults and even children because this would teach them at a young age that there is a big difference between fighting and debating.
Secondly, i agree in regards to debate being just a game and you need to support which ever side your on to get the most points..thats the point.
Like Tyler said: We need to look at these subjects on a more personal level, so we can get to the (real) answer, which can better the outcome of the debate topic.
Stephanie Marrama
Argue & Debate Reaction
Within the first paragraph she mentions that debate should be a required subject in school and I agree, it most definitely should be. Bringing students up with debate from high school through college would really benefit many students and increase their overall level of education. Knowing how to argue both sides of an issue, whether you believe your side or not, can make you a very well-rounded student and debater.
I like the way persuasion is used as a tool to win others over to your side because if you get good at doing it the right way, it works!
As citizens yes, we may naturally look beyond the argument & debate factor of the issue and start digging deeper as in thinking about effects on the real world but; if we were brought up being taught debate through grade school, we'd be able to set aside the 'impacts' effect and focus purely on the actual argument.
Courtney Andrade
Argue & Debate Reaction
I also agree with everyone that Debate is a great tool in which it would benefit everyone if they were to learn it. I think knowing the difference between a "fight" and an "argument/debate" would greatly influence individuals' ability to communicate in a less combative state, and learn to make it a more constructive form of comminication. I also think in one way, we should be conducting debates with more emotion behind the argument, while in another way we shouldn't be considering it's more about the act of debate, not the long term effects on people involved.
Courtney Andrade
Argue & Debate Reaction
I also agree with everyone that Debate is a great tool in which it would benefit everyone if they were to learn it. I think knowing the difference between a "fight" and an "argument/debate" would greatly influence individuals' ability to communicate in a less combative state, and learn to make it a more constructive form of comminication. I also think in one way, we should be conducting debates with more emotion behind the argument, while in another way we shouldn't be considering it's more about the act of debate, not the long term effects on people involved.
The most positive result of a debate done well is that the opposing team, the audience and perhaps even the judges will walk away hearing your argument. While a passionate argument is key to winning, passion seems to have gone awry. Too often the goal it seems, is to be right and the ideas of the opposition are never heard. This of course is most evident within the arena of political analysis. Perhaps teaching debate in public schools would be the place to begin change, as todays students, will eventually be tomorrows pundits.
I agree with the fact that both sides do need to be heard in an argument. Successfully arguing one side of an issue is typically easy, especially if that is the side you believe to be true. But persuading other people to believe the opposite side of the argument, even though you, yourself don't believe in it, is truly an art. It does take logic and reason to be able to convince someone of both sides, regardless of their beliefs.
As with the rest of the class, I agree with the author that debate should be a required subject in schools.
I came to this class the first day knowing basically nothing about debate, and already I am starting to see it's importance for society. Like Samantha L. said, we can look at debate in light of entire nations. Her reference to 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq illustrates perfectly something the author said: "we are morally obliged to look beyond the arguments—no matter how logical or persuasive—to see what their effects may be in the real world".
Something else I took from this blog post is the concept that one is "arguing for points, not power". Argument and debate, to me, seemed like it must have something to do with power - isn't persuading someone a powerful thing? Isn't getting them to change their mind a way of exerting power over them? When I think about debate on a larger scale, about politics and nations, I feel like power necessarily comes into play. This is something I would like to discuss in class.
The author closes by saying "
Looking at the impacts of arguments is not part of being a good debater. It’s part of being a compassionate, responsible human being". I thought this was a powerful statement, because it implies that debate plays a much larger role in the world than I ever thought.
I feel as though the author of the debate explanations sums up the real feeling about debate. it is straight to the point that it cannot be personal but strictly professional. Argument and debate should be a necessity in school it will open younger childrens shy sides and get them ready for public speaking and or argumentation in college. every person has to face the fear of speaking in front of an audience so how much easier could it be to practice the nerves away and debate both sides of a subject just to know all your information to a point where you barely need a paper to lead or guide the points. Debate is now clear to be defined as a non personal defending of a subject in which you are unaware of whom or what you are defending.
Shannon
Post a Comment