Debating Values: Key Issues in Formatting an Argumentative Case.
Saved in:
| Title: | Debating Values: Key Issues in Formatting an Argumentative Case. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Scott, David K. |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 20 |
| Publication Date: | 1998 |
| Document Type: | Opinion Papers Speeches/Meeting Papers |
| Descriptors: | Debate, Debate Format, High Schools, Higher Education, Persuasive Discourse, Values |
| Abstract: | This paper analyzes the components of an "ideal" debate using a non-policy proposition. It is argued that debates using non-policy propositions are currently plagued by a variety of problems. Value propositions on the college level are dissimilar to the value propositions used in high school Lincoln-Douglas debate. Many debaters are somewhat pre-deterministic in their selection of value(s) to advocate in relation to the debate proposition. There is a lack of understanding in the debate community regarding the role of criteria as a prima facie issue. There are abusive debate practices that generally permutate resolutions of value into de-facto policy propositions. This paper outlines a preferred argumentative process when debating an intercollegiate proposition of value. Specifically, it is concluded that the adoption of "real world" models of value adjudication would improve the argumentative quality of college debate rounds. (Contains 19 references.) (Author/NKA) |
| Entry Date: | 1998 |
| Accession Number: | ED418458 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | This paper analyzes the components of an "ideal" debate using a non-policy proposition. It is argued that debates using non-policy propositions are currently plagued by a variety of problems. Value propositions on the college level are dissimilar to the value propositions used in high school Lincoln-Douglas debate. Many debaters are somewhat pre-deterministic in their selection of value(s) to advocate in relation to the debate proposition. There is a lack of understanding in the debate community regarding the role of criteria as a prima facie issue. There are abusive debate practices that generally permutate resolutions of value into de-facto policy propositions. This paper outlines a preferred argumentative process when debating an intercollegiate proposition of value. Specifically, it is concluded that the adoption of "real world" models of value adjudication would improve the argumentative quality of college debate rounds. (Contains 19 references.) (Author/NKA) |
|---|
