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

Re: Maxwell's spewing comment

Hi Everyone!

One humorous problem I have noticed with this list is that many weekends a
large number of debaters are at tournaments and so are not able to be on the
Net, and during the weeks they have school work and such, and so don't have
time to respond.  At least that is my situation most of the time.  However,
I think this can be, and already is, a great way to have a useful discourse
(a word I heard a lot of last weekend :-))

On Nov. 8, Michael Marshall wrote:
  Max wrote:
>>Life is not going to slow down so you can take notes and then think
>>about what to respond to, and how.  Going fast puts us in real life
>>time constraints -- we are forced to comprahend and respond to

>You make a very good point but it doesn't quite make sense to me.

     I noticed this also, however what I think is Max's fundemental
reasoning behind this is that not all debaters are going to be lawyers--for
example myself-- and so that kind of preparation and training are not
needed, per se, although they could have benefits.  There are really
different classes of skills one can receive from debate:  Research skills,
Thinking skills, Speaking skills, and Personal Interaction skills.  Maybe
someone else can add some more.  And it is only Speaking skills that are
possibly adversely affected by fast debate-the term "spewing" often seems
to have a negative connotation of 'bad fast debate', and thus I think it is
not always the most accurate term to use.
   A more concise answer is that one can both debate and speak fast, and
still have the ability to speak and argue slowly or "real world lawyer"
speed.  I think of a number of former debaters who have gone on to law
school to become lawyers.  Also, it seems to me that most people know that
different situations require different styles of speech and argumentation,
and will adapt to their circumstances.

>If anyone begins to spew then
>the other team has go at an increased speed to tackle all of the  
>arguements. [...]

I think you are right that there is a general positive feedback loop in
which debate gradually gets faster and faster-at least the average does;
there has always been faster and slower regions and tournaments in CEDA.
The question here generally comes down to whether this is good or bad.

>I guess it all boils down to whether or not
>someone considers public speaking to be a significant part of  
>debate's educational mission, which means that majority (or is it  
>mob?) rule will decide the day as either all speech-oriented judges  
>drop spewers or spew-oriented judges drop slower speakers.

Here I believe you are incorrect in this rather depressing image of the
future...  :-)  I think what happens is that various teams adapt to who
their critic is.  At some level, it makes sense competitivly-you are more
likely to win if you don't do something the judge hates- and since many
people in debate care about winning that is a powerful incentive to be able
to debate well both for speech-oriented critics and for speed-oriented
critics.
  You are right that part of the issue here is really a question of what is
the goal of intercollegiate debate: is it an eduacational one, a competitive
one, a skill-based one, a "fun" one, or some combination?  That question
probably deserves it's own thread, so if anyone is interested in discussing
that I invite them to start a new thread on that.  I think, however, the
issue of speed in debate rounds can be discussed without being forced to
defend any one "goal" for debate.  For even under an educational
paradigm-(the most traditional and the one most usually associated with
"slower" debate)  there can be rather compelling reasons for allowing, and
possibly even encouraging, rapid debate.  Some common educational aspects
to fast debate are: education about more arguements; the training of
'how to speak quickly' involves lots of practice and drills to control
ones enunciation, breathing, and the emotional level of ones speech; and
that you can learn to speak well, and to speak fast-they are not mutually
exclusive.

   I would encourage anyone who is on the list-serv, and has just be
"listening", to speak out.  For this community to work we need interaction
by as many people as possible, and everyone can help to build that.  I'm
looking forward to some interesting discussions here.

Jonathan Stanton
Cornell Forensics Society
jrs3@cornell.edu
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page