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

Re: The Meaning of Competition

At 11:31 AM 5/24/97 PST, Domenic M Battistella wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>
Well right, and this means that the counterplan must be mutually exclusive
with the plan (which can never exist) or net benificial to the plan or
permutation (e.g. inadvisability).  I don't see what is so difficult about
this concept.
>>>>>>>>>>

What's difficult is believing what you have written. I disagree that mutual
exclusive can never exist (oh it's rare, but possible). I also disagree that
a c/plan is "net beneficial" to the plan....... but this is ground well covered.

>>>>>>>>>>
>This is the original meaning of competition, and it is one that has
>some benefit to its use even in an age of net benefits comparison.  
>And it doesn't involve a counterplan being superior to the plan.

Oh, yes it does.
>>>>>>>>>>

Good answer. Well said, well said. Now what, exactly is your warrant for
this claim? Mike wrote about a thousand words explaining, very eloquently,
why and how net benefits has nothing to do with the c/plan being better than
the plan. Would you care to elaborate on why he was incorrect?

>>>>>>>>>>
So what is competition again.  If I read your definition correctly it is
forced choice between two policies do to the impossibility or inadvisability
of doing both.  
>>>>>>>>>>

Correct. This is exactly right.

>>>>>>>>>>
The only thing is regardless of if your cp is based on opportunity cost or
fiat, the cost of the lost opportunity, fiated or otherwise, must outweigh
the benifit of the plan at hand. 
>>>>>>>>>>

Yes, this is true.

>>>>>>>>>>
The only way you can force chouce, as stated above, is if the two options
existing in the same world are inadvisable.  
>>>>>>>>>>

Yes, yes, you're doing fine.

>>>>>>>>>>
This means the counterplan is better.  
>>>>>>>>>>

ARGH!!! It only means that the c/plan alone is better than the two options
existing in the same world (ie: the permutation). It does NOT mean that the
c/plan is better than the plan. That would be based on advantages, NOT on
net benefits.

>>>>>>>>>>
Several years ago we would be having this exact debate in round.  Over time
a consensus grew in the debate community. 
>>>>>>>>>>

I guess there isn't nearly as much "consensus" as you think.

>>>>>>>>>>
>e) People, it's just what the word means!  Webster's (full cite upon
>request) defines competition as "the act of seeking or endeavoring to
>gain that for which another is also striving."  Notice that winning 
>wasn't in that definition.

Yeah, but webster doesn't debate.
>>>>>>>>>>

Clever answer. I'm sure you win a lot of topicality debates answering the
defs this way.

I have a novel idea, since you are so into "consensus", why not take a poll
on the L as to how many people think that the definition of competition (at
least the net benefits part) is that the c/plan must be superior to the perm
OR the plan, and how many think that it means the c/plan must be superior to
the perm ONLY.

Interested???


Peace,

Bob Lechtreck
Bakersfield College
PUTTING OUT FIRES, AND DAMN GOOD DEBATERS
db8coach@lightspeed.net
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page