Blog

Following each Team Debate in which you do not participate, you will submit a 500-word essay reviewing the essential arguments of the debate and reflecting on your impressions of how the debate went. You should provide information about specific moments from the debate to support your impressions. This assignment must be written in third-person, omniscient narrator, academic voice. All standard writing conventions apply including using: correct tenses (present when talking about philosophies, past when speaking about people and events from the past); proper grammar; and clear and concise writing in a way that objectively reports the debates. Debate Reviews are due by midnight seven days after the debate. If you give the assignment a legitimate effort and submit it on time, you will get five (5) out of (10) points. If you follow all writing conventions including grammar, sentence structure, and avoid any issues that negatively affect readability, you will receive three (2) points. If you maintain use of the third-person, academic, omniscient narrator voice, you will receive the last two (3) points. The first class bate for THL 325 took place on January 19th, 2017. The debate topic was chosen by the ins , and one team took the side of arguing that Coke is best. Their opponent argued that Diet Coke was superior to Coke. The bate o with the D Co team claiming that their product s better n the other team’s because it contained “no c .” that opening and the health-related retort returned by the e team, it was to d any r debate st giving or to the proceedings. Because of the format of the bate divided each round into three phases, the two te

ams of t stud h either themselves with too m e or too time remaining in each . The awkward between phases gave the debate an edgy kind of el with members of th t wing signs of stress and anxiety. Perhaps some of the edginess of the bate is owed to the fact that the am arguing for Coke was disrespectful and lo when they addressed r o . The format of the d dictates that there are specific sections of t in ch each team either states its , or when it refutes the opposition’s assertions. When a t fails to observe the debate e of being silent until its turn to , that violating am is penalized by essentially for the round to the op . Civil b is also an in d , but the Co team frequently changed the focus of the to one op . Although it is r to make per attacks against one’s op in debates, personal a are usual a n that teams are running out of lid, topical poi to support their vi . In the instance of the ‘s first debate, , being impolite and aggressive seemed to e shut down the team. As disheartening as it was for the s to see the Diet C team be and bullied into submission, the one-sided of the debate demonstrated that debates are about more than content and c: th also about charisma, ck wit, and assertiveness. Because each stud in the c l participate in a debate if he or she was not one of the x in the first one, the first debate was a go lesson in how to pare and intellectually for a specific of conflict. It is to that any one of the six debating stud had any personal stakes in the debate, but the tone and intensity of the first debate suggests that debating r to t challenge or at least in personally-held v could become even more hostile.