In another thread, Loren646 has taken the position that High School classes should only teach information that is applicable to and used by, “99% of adults in their everyday lives,” I argue that such is not the case. My position is that we should take classes regarding specific subjects and complete certain academic tasks because it helps us determine what careers we would like to pursue and where our interests are. I further argue that it helps make us more well-rounded individuals and increases our open-mindedness.
I challenge Loren646 to prove any or all of my positions wrong.
I would ask the judges that if they feel Loren646 proves any of my positions or all of my positions wrong that they award her victory in this debate. Contrastly, if I successfully defend all of my positions (not to the point where they are proven right) but just to the point where they are not conclusively proven wrong, then I win the debate.
The rules will be three posts apiece. I defer to my opponent the option of selecting who posts first.
Both myself and my opponent will each find our own judge, the two judges will agree on the third judge.
i just made a rather bulky response in that thread, i think it would be a pertinent read even though i express no ideas of my own in terms of what education should be like.
That’s not my argument. My position is High School classes should not teach information that is applicable to and used by only 1% of adults in their everyday lives.
If I may, I think the topic is too specific. Why not make the debate more general, where Pavlovian defends his vision for the structure of education, and Loren defends hers/his? The basic argument is over how widely applicable subject matter should be, and it looks like there is still disagreement about that, even though Loren clarified that s/he had no intention of defending the position ascribed to her in the OP.
Lol that’s funny. In it i wrote about how school trains you to do repetitive menial mental tasks and doesn’t teach you how to read and digest large amounts of information.
Do you read books?
If you plan to go to university, i suggest that you begin acclimitizing yourself to doing ALLOT of reading.
edit: i seen your reply, it seems we are largely in concordance. It is indeed sad that the government has turned “education” into a social training center designed to turn out large numbers of weak minded people.
I’m looking foreward to reading the ideas as to what school should actually be like
I agree with Carleas. We will each open up our posting with a post dedicated to what vision we have for the public school system. After that, we will each have two more posts where we critique and debate perceived flaws in what the other said while expanding upon our own positions.
Same rules apply for judges. If you accept, my judge is Xunzian.
Again, I defer to my opponent the right to choose who posts first.
if you want to make this a competition fine. i’m not trying to feed my ego or stand up for a belief just because I originally chose it and want to stand firm to my original choice even when I’m wrong which you are obviously doing and completely baseless and wrong.
First select your judge, and then the two judges will decide on a third.
(The Statement Below is not To Be Considered for the Debate Record)
Loren, I would never defend or insinuate that my positions and viewpoints are 100% correct because that would be nearly impossible. Furthermore, I do not believe, nor would I insinuate that you are 100% incorrect because that would be nearly impossible. The, “Right,” answer is probably something in between where I stand and where you stand, and this debate will help us determine where that in-between point is.
Additionally, I have my reasons for this. This forum has been slow for a while now and I rather enjoy these debates, so I thought I would come out of my cave, take an absolute side, and liven things up a bit around here.
(Back on the Record)
If it is equitable to my opponent (due to the fact that I do not work Sundays) I would request that the post time limit be 72 hours.
Loren, I wish you the best of luck and can assure you that I will show you the utmost respect in this debate as I am sure you will do for me.
Should we start a new thread starting from the beginning? Also is it possible to select moderators as judges? I don’t know if the two judges will agree on a third.
There will be a seperate thread that only we and the judges have access to when the actual debate starts.
My judge, Xunzian, is a moderator. Consider your judge wisely, though. It is going to be important to choose someone that you believe starts off agreeing with you.
The two judges will agree on a third, that is the way it is often done.
I am not a moderator or anything, but I am a long time poster of this site and I am very excited that you instigated a topic that so quickly struck a chord with me. This debate will open both of our minds to new opinions and ways of thinking. Our conversation in the other thread is the reason that I have ever considered the potential flaws in the education curriculum, so your statements have already served to open my mind to new ways of thinking.
Awesome. How does the judging work? I have asked Wonderer and this poster graciously said they would be willing to help but this poster works M-F so it is very difficult for this individual to do bulk reading then.
Wonderer would still make an excellent judge. Wonderer would only have to do bulk reading on the week-end or whenever is convenient. The judge that they mutually agree upon could be the moderator, so Wonderer would only have to actually read anything when we are finished debating one another.
How the judging works is pretty much they are not deciding which position is right or wrong, what they are doing is going into it (ideally from a standpoint of knowing nothing on the matter) listening to our presentations, rebuttals, and counter-rebuttals/conclusions, and making a decision as to who states their point in the most convincing manner.
The two most important keys to a debate are salesmanship and the ability to bullshit, I would say that the actual ability to argue is a distant third.
Anyway, all the moderator does (prior to the actual judging) is let people know when it is their turn to post and can optionally make a post alerting someone that they are low on time. You seem to be here on a daily basis, and I am here everyday except Sunday, so 72 hours should not be a problem for either of us. There are exceptions, though, I mean if you had a lot on your plate one day and PM’ed me that you needed an extra day or so, I would not object.
When we are done debating, the three judges post their decisions and that is the end of it.
We also usually add a poll in the Discussion board, and people who aren’t debating can critique the debate.
To sum up so far:
Debate on the proper structure of high-school education.
3 posts each, alternating,
72 hours per post,
judges: Xunzian, Wonderer, and an as-yet-undetermined third.
Edit that if it’s wrong. Otherwise, all you need’s the third judge, and you’re ready to go.