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

Mexico: The illusion of innovation & "Time off"take heavy course-loads, study abroad, do internships, participate in their

It would be unfortunate if CEDA, in the name of "innovation" chooses the
identical format of the other major debate organizations. I'm distressed to
read that most of the discussion concerning topic alternatives focuses on the
Mexico/info trade-off rather than the broader philosophical questions
involved. If we select this option, who would ever feel safe not debating
each topic as if it were year-round? Debaters at all programs would then be
exposed to the enormous opprotunity costs currently faced only by those
programs that willingly select that option.

It also strikes me as silly that we're unable to contemplate a broader notion
of the info topic than the nanno/bio/a-lie route. Sure, these arguments will
be run, but the idea that they're somehow intrinsic to the topic it true if
and only if judges and teams are willing to look the other way on
link/uniqueness arguments. Does anyone really believe that the vast majority
of information-policy alternatives meaningfully impact A-life? I sure don't,
but I've always been a stickler on disad burdens.

I'd be the last person to force other Directors to structure their programs
as we have structured ours at Gustavus. Our decision not to debate in the
Fall is, at least partially, linked with the requirement that a single
Director must serve as coach for both the IE and debate squads. Even if we
wanted to travel in the fall, it would be exceptionally difficult to squeeze
in seven to ten IE tournament along with a full Fall debate schedule. I will
say, however, that this option has yeilded tremendous benefits to me and the
debate students in the area of opprotunity costs. The debaters are much more
excited about debate with the fall off, and they're ready to work hard
(really hard) because they only have to do it for four months. Likewise, I've
got time to do the other things that go along with teaching, directing a
program, writing, etc. Matt might find that the answer to his prayers lies
not in an illusory, "Holiday break," which if taken in earnest would surely
result in a loss of competitive potential, but rather a new way of thinking
regarding the Fall semester.

Information technology and Mexico both strike me as solid topic areas. The
depth/bredth debate is mostly a function of the nature of the topic, rather
than the length of time it is debated. Those who desire narrow topics and
increased depth should take a gander at the narrowness of recent NDT
resolutions. Fall, Spring, year-round, whatever -- if you really want this
type of clash, the answer lies in propositional wording rather than duration.

Oh well, another lengthy spheil from me. I merely want to remind people of
the philosophical implications of this choice. It's not a choice between
Mexico and Info-Tech. It's a choice between whether or not CEDA as an
organization believes that debate should be the centerpiece of our lives for
four months or eight. I've done both, and my view is that being a
debat-o-phile for four months is much more personally fulfilling than being
one for eight months or not at all. PAV
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page