[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Re: Speed
I invoke the assumption of reciprocity.
You want my debaters to adapt to you and speak more slowly, and we will be
glad to do that. You however, seem unwilling to have your debaters adapt to
anything but the style you like. What is wrong with this picture?
If adaptation is good then I call for adaptation to all judges, as they are
all worthy of our respect. The fact that your debaters have to prepare to
adapt to a style other than yours behind your back seems to me, somehow,
wrong.
Please explain why you need not adapt to approaches you disagree with but
others must adapt to you?
Novice debate seems slow enough for me and my raw novices. If not, then I
have no problem with a different format and a different division. Let a
thousand flowers bloom. A world with multiple debate formats reflects the
differences between different communication contexts, so I prefer it to a
world with only one debate format.
Once again, the bottom line seems to be that we have to adapt to judges who
prefer slower delivery but they don't want their students to adapt to
judges who prefer a more rapid delivery. And there it is, at the bottom
line, the assumption that you are RIGHT and others are WRONG. I say we are
neither. I say there are different judges and students must learn to adapt
to all of them.
There have been a lot of indications as to how rapid delivery improves
cognition and communication skills. I urge those in favor of much slower
delivery to do the same for their position.
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
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page