Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

NFA LD Debate Coop Final 2009 (1NC CX) PART 2 of 5

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
1,415
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Aug 17, 2009

This is the final round of the NFA LD Debate Cooperative summer program. On the Affirmative is Frank Murdoch of Western Kentucky. On the Negative is James (JimJam) Hilbert. The resolution for this year's topic is-
Resolved: That the United States federal government should substantially reform transportation infrastructure.
This was the final round of competition, decided on a 7-2 decision... See the description on part 5 for results. Recorded on August 8, 2009.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 0 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (7)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @laurenmnholt Well, I'm pretty sure that we need lawyers, so good point. But lawyers are known for deception and are associated with a "truth for hire", "if you have enough money, you're not guilty" kind of thing- Sophistry. Sure people should be able to defend what they say, or defend truth quickly, but that is just one component of debate. Somehow, truth needs to be made the focus. It seems too aimed at talking in front of ignorant mobs.

  • @TheLonelyImmortal; Actually, debate is a game that enables debaters to think many times faster than people who don't and learn how to make good, critical arguments quickly. Imagine if every person on jury could distinguish a good argument from a bad one. Or even better, imagine if there were no games like debate that enabled people to learn how to defend something they don't necessarily believe. Then we would have no defense lawyers and the entire system would collapse.

  • I'm taking a debate class and I was appalled by my discovery that "debate" has degenerated into a sport or perhaps was always just a sport- not a serious endeavor towards truth. Winners are not decided based on who was right, but who convinced. And imagine if juries were not allowed to deliberate, not given evidence to look at themselves, or given other legal requirements. Our justice system would be a joke. This is a dangerous way to decide anything, which is why I'm pretty sure nothing is.

  • Talking way too fast, and try to stand up straight.

  • bad case how could you get to the finals maybe because of your argumentation

  • Wow, you're smart. Bravo

  • lol.

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more