[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Reply to penders re poll 2

On 7-MAR-1995 00:46:09.62 received the following; my replies included.      

>****I'm sorry to leave a message at the end of a long response, thus
limiting
>the number of people who may have the patience to wade through all this
>stuff, but if the sole issue really is, as asserted above a "subtle
>influence" then
>
>No.1--That is UTTERLY not unique. There are more unmeasureable subtle
>influences on debate judging than I can think of in relations to
>adjudicating almost anything else (except figure skating, maybe).  Any
>impact would be absolutely un-noticeable.  

Arguing that it is subtle influence does not mean that it is
insignificant...The claim that there are other influences should not excuse
ethical inquiry re the poll...I have suggested ethical inquiry re this and
other practices.

>No. 2 There is no way to legislate
>against all the "subtle influences", because it is impossible to
>understand sometimes even what is overtly motivating some critics much
>less
>attempting to analyze their subconscious influences.(Or even state of
>mind; as Dr. Robert Roblands says, "A debate judge is Not a rational
>animal".) (And besides, some critics are so lost that they are looking for
>any and all hints to help them out)

No one has suggested legislation of this sort. I did the opposite in my
posting to you... 

The poll is subtle and meaningful. The poll was advertised as a national
coaches poll of the top ten teams. Many respondents initially commented on
the credibility of the poll; others considered its influence on campus
administrators for fund-raising. With considerable irony, many proponents of
the poll now undermine and qualify its credibility to deflect criticism about
its influence (now described by proponents as an opinion of 20 coaches rather
than a national poll, unscientific, unrepresentative, and an irrelevancy). I
wonder if that information is sent to campus administrators. I also wonder if
anyone has considered these statements in the context of the poll as an
additional reward for deserving students...

The poll is a numerical ranking system that serves to summarize student
performances---it passes judgment, considers and accounts, the many
influences, subtle and not, that occur in debates and at tournaments. It
summarizes the debate experience.

The poll may be subtle when it is compared to a totalizing method of
indoctrination. I certainly have never suggested that it is a magical device
to control minds. It is subtle, not unimportant. Subtle communication can
persuade...A poll can assault the autonomy of the judge; it can
recontextualize the information of the debate, making a judge more
susceptible to appeals from a more credible source of authority; it provides
simple, ordered information, avoiding the turmoil, confusion, and
subjectivity of decision-making; it substitutes a sham harmony for the tense
antagonisms and conflicts that characterize debate, permitting a judge to
feel in step with the consensus of opinion. (As Marcuse notes in
One-Dimensional Man, communication limits critical thought when it eliminates
tensions and conflicts, replaces autonomous production with formal
operations, reconciles differences with the illusion of agreement, and
co-opts the voice of the excluded with repressive tolerance).
 
>***FINALLY and the whole reason I started to leave this post was to make
>this argument [not the preamble above, which is also true]
>and that is:
>
>What is intellectual dishonesty?  I think it is the allowance of
>extraneous ideas and influences to persuade a critic to make a
>decision.(Like a poll, or other'subtle influences' referred to above).I'm
>disagreeing with the concept that that occurs knowingly and since it
>doesn't occur knowingly  a poll would only be one more linear non unique
>subtle influence. 
>Intellectual dishonesty includes the presence of consideration of these
>so-called `subtle influences' when decision making.  It is no straw
>argument to suggest that that does not occur, except in ways that are
>absolutely impossible to legislate against, and that a poll does not
>significantly increase the `impact' (wrong decisions) in ANY meaningful way.
>Thanks.

I am only critical of respondents who suggest that information has no
influence. And, as even a cursory reading of this thread will reveal, many
respondents have denied ethical responsibility re communication, claimed that
information has no influence, and that debate coaches are immune to
influence...Knowing the power of the poll is sufficient for one to take
personal responsibility re the poll. I have never suggested anything more
than that.

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