Debate Proposal: Are Thunderf00t’s Actions Justified?

If anyone is interested I was wondering if people would like to engage in a civil debate (no ad homs, character assassinations, etc) regarding Thunderf00t’s recent actions. I will personally moderate the debate, and edit individual posts according to the level of civility displayed. We will agree to the structure of the debate beforehand. The writing must be formal and presented in a logical fashion. In other words, not like Thunderf00t’s blog! 😀

P.S. If you feel that your core argument has been edited in any way (I promise I won’t edit the argument itself!), screen capture your argument prior to the debate for evidence.
Prior to the debate, recommended reading:

http://users.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/baloney.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

Some suggested debate formats from the Freethought and Rationalism Discussion Board:

Suggestions for Debate Formats

To add some variety to formal debates, I’m offering some suggestions for debate formats that some of you may like instead of the traditional way it’s been done. This is by no means a complete list of ideas:

– Standard format

Each round consists of two statements. One affirming and the other responding. The final round may be in the form of a summary or concluding statement (not introducing new material).

– Double Affirmant Debate

Similar to the standard format, but each debater takes turns affirming a position with the other debater rebutting. For example, two participants agree to debate the age of the earth for 7 rounds. For the first three rounds, the creationist goes first, attempting to present positive evidence for a young earth, while the evolutionist responds in the negative, attempting to rebut the YEC’s arguments. For the next three rounds, the evolutionist takes the positive position, presenting arguments for an old earth with the YEC attempting to rebut his/her claims each round. The seventh round will consist of the concluding statements from each debater.

– Three Way Discussion

Each rounds consists of all three proponents arguing for their position and comparing and contrasting their viewpoints with the others (i.e. 3 statements per round). For example, 3 different theistic proponents argue their positions on YEC, OEC, and theistic evolution.

– Interrogative debate/discussion

This is similar to the ‘Double Affirmant’ debate, but instead of taking a ‘claim vs. rebuttal’ style, the person going first asks questions, in point form, and the person responding must attempt to answer them all. The debaters do this for a number of rounds and switch as questioner and answerer for an equal number of rounds. A concluding round allows the debaters to sum up their views.

– Concurrent debate

A concurrent debate is just like a standard debate, except that the statements for each round are revealed to the forum at the same time. A debate participant’s post will remain invisible until his or her opponent submits his or her post in the same round.

– Role Reversal debate

This debate is somewhat unique in that debaters actually argue for the positions they oppose for a time. For a number of rounds (similar to the standard format), the debaters attempt to defend their positions and offer rebuttals to the very positions they agree with. On the second last round, the debaters switch back to their respective positions (with the debater who went second in the previous rounds going first) and attempt to criticize their own approaches and how his/her opponent approached the issue. The last round will consist of the final statements.

– Presentation and Rebuttal debate

This debate would take place in two parts: the presentation phase and the rebuttal phase. In the presentation phase, the debaters do not interact with each other and instead present their fully developed arguments. In the rebuttal phase, the debate participants would then attempt to refute each other’s fully developed argument and defend their own. This kind of debate would best be utilized in the context of a concurrent debate (see above).

Advertisements

~ by theuncynic on August 11, 2012.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: