Final Debates--Topic Review #3

The topic, "Mankind is inherently good." is a basic premise argument in philosophy. Based on the resolution, many observations and assumptions can be made about the state of man. The resolution assumes man is a positive force, possessing altruistic characteristics. Governments form for the "commonweal" of man--meaning progress is normally good because man at his/her base level, is a good creature and can make positive, conscious decisions. With the premise that mankind is generally good, then societies and institutions for the general good prevail. Those who understand altruism, self-actualization, and the general tenets of most major religions support the resolution.

The negative area of the debate is very all-encompassing. Proving mankind is anything besides generally good will provide the negative rationale for the debate. Whether man is selfish, operates through vested interests or can only exist through conflict is reasonable ground against the resolution The philosophy of Hegel, Nitescheze, and Etzioni will give plenty of rationale for this topic area.

Final Debates--Topic Review #2

The second topic is a classic "society versus the individual" argument. The resolution calls for the needs of the majority taking precedence over individual rights. Some would say this was the primary philosophy of Fascism seen in Italy and Germany in the 1930s or the de facto actions of Communist China and the Soviet Union during the Cold War era. However, we see such actions as seizing private property through "imminent domain" here in the United States for public works projects. In the 20th century, the US saw actions by the legislative branch (House Un-American Activities Committee) destroy individuals and the actions were strongly supported by the public. Probably the big question in the resolution implies that we determined the "will of the masses" through some kind of process. How do we determine, "The will of the masses?" Is it determined through a democratic process, a representative procedure, or an edict from a bureaucracy? Most of the events described in Topic Review #1 also apply to this resolution for both Affirmative and Negative arguments.

The opposition to the resolution can use the United States Constitution and the Amendments to support the premise we hold individual rights at least as important if not more important to majority rule. Historically the US Constitution could not pass until a Bill of Rights was assured. Most of US law is based on due process clauses in the 5th and 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Many of the major Supreme Court decisions of the past 100 years supports individual rights over the authority of government or majority opinion in contemporary society.

Understanding the legal as well as traditional history of the United States will greatly assist your efforts in debating this topic.

Final Debates--Topic Review #1

As you prepare for your final debates this week, you will need to understand the three possible topics for the debates. Remember you will draw one of the three topics, another person will select affirmative or negative, then both have five minutes to prepare to compete.

1. Extremism in defense of liberty is justified...This is an offshoot of a famous quote from Vice-Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater ("Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice."). I changed the last phrase for better understanding of the resolution. The United States has a history of "extreme" measures taken by the government during crisis. During the Civil War, the federal government ignored civil rights at times when it detained people who opposed the war effort, closed newspapers that published stories critical of the government, and even ignored the rulings of the Supreme Court. Some would say the actions of Gov. Oliver P. Morton of Indiana during the Civil War is a prime example supporting the resolution. Gov. Morton basically ruled Indiana as a dictator during the majority of the war (He did not allow the Indiana General Assembly to meet during the war.) Other examples include the relocation of Japanese-Americans during WW II and the Bush administration's approval of torture to obtain information about Islamic terrorism activities this decade. All these events support the ideal, "The ends justifies the means."

Those opposing the resolution can argue liberty is destroyed by the very acts of suppressing individual rights. When a government violates its own laws for the "greater good," then individual have little to no protection from an extremist government and liberty is destroyed. The relocation of Japanese-Americans (including the loss of businesses, homes, and property) or America's long history of ignoring treaty agreements with Native Americans and ensuing genocide are prime examples of the impact of extremism. Even in wartime, America has followed some form of legal rights at times as seen during the Nuremburg and Tokyo Tribunals following WW II. In philosophy, one sees a classic "social contract" position and "individual rights" as opposing the resolution.

Hopefully this will assist you in your efforts to further analyze and research this resolution.

Definitions-Final Debates

We are one week away from starting the last debates of the semester. It is extremely important you know the definitions that are appropriate in the context of the resolutions for the following words:

extremism
defense
liberty
justified
will
masses
supercedes
rights
individual
mankind
inherently

Knowing these definitions will greatly help you in understanding the boundaries of the debate resolution.

Coming Up.....Final Debate!!!

As we we finish up our Student Congress debates over the next 4-5 school days, I want to give an preview of what we will do the last few weeks of the semester.

All debate classes will participate in a debate "battle royale" supreme cage match. Each class will hold its own tournament with the winners of each class competing against each other to decide the Supreme Debator for the Fall Semester. The debates are called, "Spontaneous Debate" This is a one-on-one debate. At the beginning of the round, a student will draw the debate topic. The debate topic will be one of the following choices:

1. Extremism in defense of liberty is justified
2. The will of the masses supersedes the rights of the individual
3. Mankind is inherently good

Once the topic is drawn, the competitors will have 5 min. to prepare for their debate. The breakdown for the debate follows:

Aff--4 min.
CX--2 min
Neg--4 min
CX--2 min
AFF Rebuttal--2 min
NEG Rebuttal--2 min

Students who are out of the tournament will receive grades based on written critiques on debates they watch in class. Participating debators in the tournament will be scored based on their debates. More details will follow, but expect debates to begin on Dec. 7th.

Congrats!

Wanted to give a shout out to Tonio Thomas for being the sole Shortridge competitor at our tournament this weekend! Tonio participated in the middle school Student Congress on Sat. morning.

Shortridge Debate Tournament

Reminder the Shortridge Debate Tournament is this weekend! If you compete in the tournament, you earn 100 extra credit points in Debate class. Middle School Congress will be held Sat. morning beginning at 7:30 AM and ending at Noon with awards immediately after the end of the session. the process and procedure is the same as what we are doing in class except a different set of bills are used (IHSFA Bills 3, 7, 10, 14). Sign-up outside Rm 214 by Thurs. and pick up a copy of the bills.

Midterm Grades

Nov. 20th marks the deadline for mid-term grades. Understand the major scores for this time period is the Blog site assignment and your speeches in Student Congress debate. We will finish Student Congress next week and this is the majority of your score in debate.

Remember you HAVE TO SPEAK ON THREE OUT OF THE FOUR BILLS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE A GRADE in Student Congress. If you speak more than three times, the LOWEST SCORE IS DROPPED AND YOUR SCORE IS BASED ON YOUR BEST THREE SPEECH SCORES.

Terms and Suggestions for Student Congress

There are some terms in the US Newspaper bill you really want to understand before you get up to speak.

Non-profit organization
Tax Exempt
Tax Deductible
Political Endorsement

Take the time to find the meaning of these terms before you start figuring out your speech.

Additionally you want to know how our country operates presidential primaries/caucuses now so you understand why the resolution recommends changes. Why would we want or not want to change to a national date for presidential primaries?

On the bottled water resolution you really want to know the meaning of the words, medicinal and sanitation.

On the International Criminal Court, be sure to know why the United States is not part of the ICC? Also know what they mean by genocide and crimes against humanity.

Order of Debate--Student Congress

1st Period

IHSFA Bill 2
IHSFA Bill 4
IHSFA Bill 12
IHSFA Bill 8

2nd Period

IHSFA Bill 4
IHSFA Bill 2
IHSFA Bill 8
IHSFA Bill 12

3rd Period

IHSFA Bill 2
IHSFA Bill 4
IHSFA Bill 12
IHSFA Bill 8

4th Period

IHSFA Bill 4
IHSFA Bill 2
IHSFA Bill 8
IHSFA Bill 12

11th Period

IHSFA Bill 2
IHSFA Bill 4
IHSFA Bill 8
IHSFA Bill 12

I already passed out a copy of the bills to students. If you lost your copy, you will need to retreive copies from online resources. Copies of the Congress bills are found at the Indiana High School Forensics Association website, www.ihsfa.org. Click on the link, 2009-2010 Congress Bills.

Sign-up for Shortridge Debate/Congress Tournament

I posted the sign-up sheets for the 1st Shortridge Debate & Congress Tournament on Nov. 20-21, 2009. If you compete in one of the debate events, spontaneous argument, Lincoln-Douglas, or Public Forum, you will compete on Friday night and Sat. If you compete in Congress, you will compete on Saturday only. The sign up sheets are outside Rm 214. There is no cost to enter this competition since we are hosting it.