Evidence-Student Judge Double Standard

[asnider@moose.uvm.edu (Alfred C. Snider)]

Damn, that's a pretty good point.

This deserves further thought, and I will give it that. As a gaming
paradigm advocate  (which, by the way, doesn't mean that anything goes or
that debate is silly because it is a game) I have some immediate reactions.

1. The role of judge and debater. The debater is the participant, and judge
is the referee or critic. Their gamed roles are quite different. The
debater can "win" or "lose" but the judge does neither, just evaluates from
outside. Different roles have different responsibilities.

2. Opportunism which exists. Allowed to rely on their own opinion, debaters
are likely to stretch their beliefs in an attempt to win. Someone agaiunst
government regulation one round may be in favor of it the next. Absent a
topic or a decisionj, I imagine that debaters could be less bound by using
evidence, but then it wouldn't really be a debate.

More to come...


Alfred C. Snider AKA Tuna
Edwin W. Lawrence Professor of Forensics, University of Vermont
Mail: Box 54225, UVM, Burlington, VT 05405-4225
Phone: 802-656-0097, Fax: 802-656-4275
DEBATE CENTRAL:
http://beluga.uvm.edu/debatecentral/dc.html
gopher://beluga.uvm.edu
LAWRENCE DEBATE UNION:
http://beluga.uvm.edu/debatecentral/ldu.html

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Why bother with topic areas?
• Next by Date: Re: Santa Speaks!!
• Prev by thread: Re: (Fwd) How to Argue Effectively (fwd)
• Next by thread: re: Evidence-Student Judge Double Standard
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page