"Hacking Traditional College's White Privilege Work"

Started by Queequeg, March 31, 2015, 08:00:21 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions

Valmy

#30
March 31, 2015, 02:35:53 PM
Wait these guys wear dashikis? How adorable.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

garbon

#31
March 31, 2015, 02:37:53 PM
Quote from: Valmy on March 31, 2015, 02:35:53 PM
Wait these guys wear dashikis? How adorable.

:angry:
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Valmy

#32
March 31, 2015, 02:40:26 PM
Quote from: garbon on March 31, 2015, 02:37:53 PM
:angry:

Sorry it reminds me of pictures of my dad's friends from the 1970s.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

grumbler

#33
March 31, 2015, 02:40:40 PM
Quote from: The Brain on March 31, 2015, 02:02:49 PM
If you identify the jury as weak and ready to respond to bogus lines of argument, deliver those arguments and win the case then that's a job well done. Happy client.

There's a lot to this.  The dysfunction doesn't come from the students, but from the organizers.  The wining teams are just doing what they need to do in order to win.  If that's not really debate, what do they care?
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Valmy

#34
March 31, 2015, 02:43:20 PM
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2015, 02:40:40 PM
There's a lot to this.  The dysfunction doesn't come from the students, but from the organizers.  The wining teams are just doing what they need to do in order to win.  If that's not really debate, what do they care?

Well right once you can throw subjective experience out there what is there to debate? 'No your experience is wrong?'
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Malthus

#35
March 31, 2015, 02:47:35 PM
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2015, 02:40:40 PM
Quote from: The Brain on March 31, 2015, 02:02:49 PM
If you identify the jury as weak and ready to respond to bogus lines of argument, deliver those arguments and win the case then that's a job well done. Happy client.

There's a lot to this.  The dysfunction doesn't come from the students, but from the organizers.  The wining teams are just doing what they need to do in order to win.  If that's not really debate, what do they care?

From a competitive position, sure.

Assuming that debating as an activity has some educational/training component, OTOH ... this type of "argument" isn't going to translate very well into other contexts.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane—Marcus Aurelius

garbon

#36
March 31, 2015, 02:48:44 PM
Quote from: Valmy on March 31, 2015, 02:40:26 PM
Quote from: garbon on March 31, 2015, 02:37:53 PM
:angry:

Sorry it reminds me of pictures of my dad's friends from the 1970s.

I have my father's from the 70s. :blush:
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Valmy

#37
March 31, 2015, 02:55:39 PM Last Edit: March 31, 2015, 02:57:56 PM by Valmy
Quote from: Malthus on March 31, 2015, 02:47:35 PM
Assuming that debating as an activity has some educational/training component, OTOH ... this type of "argument" isn't going to translate very well into other contexts.

The question of whether or not my client Mr. Chen committed a patent infringement is not the issue, it is the treatment of Asian-Americans by US Patent law! *poetry slam breaks out*

See? It can be applied.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Valmy

#38
March 31, 2015, 02:57:43 PM
Quote from: garbon on March 31, 2015, 02:48:44 PM
I have my father's from the 70s. :blush:

:lol: :thumbsup:
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Malthus

#39
March 31, 2015, 02:59:59 PM
Quote from: Valmy on March 31, 2015, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: Malthus on March 31, 2015, 02:47:35 PM
Assuming that debating as an activity has some educational/training component, OTOH ... this type of "argument" isn't going to translate very well into other contexts.

The question of whether or not my client Mr. Chen committed a patent infringement is not the issue, it is the treatment of Asian-Americans by US Patent law!

See? It can be applied.

I'm sure that argument would work a treat.  :lol:

Can't wait to try it here on a Prothonotary.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane—Marcus Aurelius

Sheilbh

#40
March 31, 2015, 03:15:12 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 31, 2015, 08:20:10 AM
It would appear that talking smack is now an organized sport.
Debating always has been here. It's based on Westminster/Oxford/Cambridge union so what matters most is convincing style not citing studies. Style matters far more than substance.

See the Economist. Written, mostly, by very young journos with a very convincing union debate style, and sells very well as an 'authorative' voice.

This sounds if nothing else interesting, which may be a good thing especially if there's different debating schools with different approaches.
Let's bomb Russia!

Malthus

#41
March 31, 2015, 03:19:23 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 31, 2015, 03:15:12 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 31, 2015, 08:20:10 AM
It would appear that talking smack is now an organized sport.
Debating always has been here. It's based on Westminster/Oxford/Cambridge union so what matters most is convincing style not citing studies. Style matters far more than substance.

See the Economist. Written, mostly, by very young journos with a very convincing union debate style, and sells very well as an 'authorative' voice.

This sounds if nothing else interesting, which may be a good thing especially if there's different debating schools with different approaches.

About as interesting as watching one team absolutely dominating at soccer when the other team is playing basketball.  :D
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane—Marcus Aurelius

Sheilbh

#42
March 31, 2015, 03:24:27 PM
It would be more fun if both sides were debating, no doubt. Time for the fact-spewing robots to catch up :P
Let's bomb Russia!

Martinus

#43
March 31, 2015, 03:27:20 PM
Quote from: Berkut on March 31, 2015, 01:58:31 PM
Quote from: The Brain on March 31, 2015, 01:53:23 PM
Debate is about winning. Good for the winners that they debate well.

This appears to be a case where some of the debaters correctly recognized that the judges would not have the balls to risk being called "RACIST!" if they shut down their attempt to hijack the topic, and hence "won" the debate by debating whatever it is they wanted, rather than the actual topic.

And of course, "whatever it is they wanted" was the cultural impact of race on themselves...which I am guessing the non-black debate team is not going to have much of a shot at competing against.

I mean, if you are just a couple of college guys or girls showing up for a debate competition, and the opposing team manages to shift the topic to "How We Have Been Screwed By Your Racist Culture", you really don't have much of a chance in that one.

You could do the old debate gambit of "Teehee you may win this shitty debate but we are not the ones getting shot for wearing a hoodie".  :nelson:

Admiral Yi

#44
March 31, 2015, 03:27:37 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 31, 2015, 03:15:12 PM
Debating always has been here. It's based on Westminster/Oxford/Cambridge union so what matters most is convincing style not citing studies. Style matters far more than substance.

See the Economist. Written, mostly, by very young journos with a very convincing union debate style, and sells very well as an 'authorative' voice.

This sounds if nothing else interesting, which may be a good thing especially if there's different debating schools with different approaches.

How many debates were won by teams that decided they didn't like the topic assigned and picked another one, stylishly?
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions