2007 NCFCA Nationals Finals 1AC (first part) & 1st CX

2007 NCFCA National Tournament Team Policy Debate Finals
Part of the Aff. 1AC & 1st CX

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• NCFCA
• 2007
• National
• Tournament
• Debate
• NATO

[WangHongDa]

How is this policy? It's a digression of policy to the old ages. The format of the speech itself looks more like PF or Parli. Evolve!

[animelover654]

HAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!! I was bored and saw this. I got a pretty good laugh out of it, too. It makes me crack up to think how these kids would do in the NFL. No, better yet, the TOC. HAAA!!!!!!!!

[NothingAtAllXD]

Evolution is false.

[V61Sunda]

@bigbyrdbrain1 NCFCA is for queers.

[bigbyrdbrain1]

@PKNproductions (CONT) Defending one's faith isn't all about destroying the opponent with your arguments. You must make sure that you can respond to their arguments in a way that can be easily understood. The two leagues have very different purposes, and to say that one is superior to the other is forgetting the purpose of the other. (And yes, I am in the NCFCA.)

[bigbyrdbrain1]

@PKNproductions The NCFCA and the NFL have two completely different purposes. NFL TP is basically verbal chess. It teaches students how to outsmart their opponents. The NCFCA, however, focuses more on the communications aspect of debate. It teaches students how to communicate their arguments more easily to the average person. The focus is on this because the purpose of the National Christian Forensics and Communications Association is to train students to be ready to defend their faith.

[PKNproductions]

@PKNproductions (CONT) Also, by slowing debate down, you are eliminating one of the major benefits of doing cx debate. Speaking faster teaches you to listen faster. Listening faster teaches you to think faster. By being able to think faster you can get down to deeper thoughts much quicker. In essence it makes you smarter.

I had more to say, but I'm tired and I'm not even sure if anyone will read this. So I'm done. If anyone wants to hear more (or argue against me) just leave me a response :)

[PKNproductions]

@PKNproductions (CONT) By just the same means, learning to spread and using it in a competitive policy debate context doesn't mean that you will lose the ability to argue for an audience. In reality you have to be able to do both, just as you have to be able to speak in both simple language and flowery language.

Next, rewarding "convincing" speech over logical speech is bad. It is the reason for the poor state of politics. People would rather vote for the charismatic guy than the smart guy.

[PKNproductions]

The problem with this style of debating is that it encourages "dumbing down" the arguments for the audience to understand.

But COMPETITIVE debate is about education. Specifically education of logic and research.

First, dumbing it down is bad for education. Its the equivalent of not teaching big words to students because the average American doesn't understand those words. Learning those words and using them in an academic context won't hinder your ability to communicate with normal people

[YourBleedingViolet]

NATO? that was the puff topic not too long ago.. what was the resolution at this time?

[NCFCADebater]

@vanNistelrooy007

lol, its NCFCA not NCFCL