• American "Debate" Winners: Top Orators in Action
    34 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Flameon;44725965]You should know that give the gravity and depth of their arguements, concision is not very easy. To understand what i'm getting at. Everyone in the room: opponents, the judges, people in the debate activity, know what Towson and OU were saying and why they won. If the panel was you, they'd slow down and change their arguements to adapt to your judging philosophy, but it isn't, so they do their things. Here is one of the debaters from OU debating in High school for a more "lay" i.e: moms, parents, etc, and changing his demeanour... but you should know that as I said above, part of OU's arguement was a kritik of having to "look and debate white" for you.[/QUOTE] That's my point. These "debates" are only there for the judges and the people participating. It's a bunch of people training and practicing so that they can [I]talk to themselves.[/I] And you don't "debate white", for fucks sake. I don't speak english British. I don't do math Banker. We abide by the rules so that what we're saying makes goddamn sense to people other than those outside of our social circle. If I'm writing a paper on Biology I don't get fill it full of southernisms and grammatical errors just because that's the dialect I personally identify with. Seriously, it's a non argument, and the fact that it is an argument here is just another nail in the coffin of formalized debate's credibility. [editline]5th May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Flameon;44726010]To an extent, there is a circle jerk... but that doesn't mean you can't get into debate and throw a wrench in the machine. One of the cool things about debate is that nothing is accepted as "given". Debaters win rounds on wacky shit. You think economic collapse is bad? Theres tons of authors who disagree. You think that global warming is bad? Some disagree. You think that death is bad? One of the best debate teams in the country lost in the Quarter Finals on an arguement that human extinction is the only ethical thing we can allow. I've lost rounds against teams for "talking fast". If the arguements against it are good and you can argue them, you can win it. Get in debate and show us up.[/QUOTE] See, this is what I'm talking about. "Yeah, well if you're so right then debate me IRL!!!" We don't need to debate you. We don't need a judge to give us a gold banana star to know you're full of shit. When you use your marvelous logical powers to actually do something halfway useful, then maybe we can talk about how viable your methodology is.
[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;44726046]People are obviously talking fast because it puts them at a distinct advantage. If anyone who wasn't a professional speed talker debated against someone who was trained in this form of structured debate they would obviously lose.[/QUOTE] The two gentlemen from OU do not talk fast. They got to finals of this tournament. At the NDT, another national tournament, they go to Semifinals. They have had multiple deep-out-round experence. Literally OP's video disproves the idea that speed is the end-all-be-all-of-debate, since OU did so well at the tournament speaking so slowly. I will admit, there is an advantage to speaking fast, but if you are good its not the end of the world. [quote] If I'm writing a paper on Biology I don't get fill it full of southernisms and grammatical errors just because that's the dialect I personally identify with. Seriously, it's a non argument, and the fact that it is an argument here is just another nail in the coffin of formalized debate's credibility. [/quote] I think OU's arguement sort of disproves that its a "nail" on any coffin. The jury is far from out on that, and if you had to talk to these two men from OU I think they'd disprove what you are saying. Maybe biology is different, but what rules are there that say, "You must speak X way" for a business, or a debate round... or even in a class room? There are some tidbits like, "Don't swear" or, "don't be disrespectful" but hardly any of it is, "Talk like a white person from the city." And yet the fact that we have that assumption speaks, as these two gents from OU would tell you, volumes of the kind of society we live in and the types of norms we expect of people. Once again though, they aren't arguing that you need to rap back at them. They say they code-switch all the time, they just don't want to in the debate round and want you to answer their arguements when they speak in black vernacular. [quote]When you use your marvelous logical powers to actually do something halfway useful, then maybe we can talk about how viable your methodology is.[/quote] Former debates have gone on to do marvelous things like argue for detainees rights, be lawyers for commuities, and tons of other skills which prove that there is something useful about lots of arguement processing in a short time span. Heres an article about switch side debate, produced during a period where 'spreading' was in full force. [url]http://www.pitt.edu/~gordonm/JPubs/EnglishDAWG.pdf[/url] Once again though.... the jury is not "out" on whether spread is a useful methodology or not. Like a lot of things .. it comes down to a debate :)
[QUOTE=Flameon;44726136]The two gentlemen from OU do not talk fast. They got to finals of this tournament. At the NDT, another national tournament, they go to Semifinals. They have had multiple deep-out-round experence. Literally OP's video disproves the idea that speed is the end-all-be-all-of-debate, since OU did so well at the tournament speaking so slowly.[/QUOTE] All of that is kind of irrelevant since the black ladies in the video are talking way faster than a normal person. On subject of talking slowly, like I said, talking fast is a practice for a reason obviously. Statistically it cannot be the norm that talking slowly allows you to win.
[QUOTE=Flameon;44726136] Maybe biology is different, but what rules are there that say, "You must speak X way" for a business, or a debate round... or even in a class room? There are some tidbits like, "Don't swear" or, "don't be disrespectful" but hardly any of it is, "Talk like a white person from the city." And yet the fact that we have that assumption speaks, as these two gents from OU would tell you, volumes of the kind of society we live in and the types of norms we expect of people. Once again though, they aren't arguing that you need to rap back at them. They say they code-switch all the time, they just don't want to in the debate round and want you to answer their arguements when they speak in black vernacular. [/QUOTE] How do you define talking like a white person?
[QUOTE=Psycho9182;44725218] [video=youtube;EvNNtEVkckc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvNNtEVkckc[/video][/QUOTE] This is ridiculous. Why can't they just, you know, shorten their argument? Instead of trying to fit 50 elephants inside a fridge.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.