EPT
[H] Debate
| Blogs > natturner |
|
natturner
342 Posts
| ||
|
Bibbit
Canada5377 Posts
| ||
micronesia
United States24690 Posts
But seriously, you might want to focus on the fact that engineers receive no training on dealing with other people. Much of the specialization of engineers is not or rarely applicable to being a politician most of the time unlike a lawyer. Not that I necessarily feel that way overall but just an idea. | ||
|
Mortality
United States4790 Posts
But in any case, winning a debate has absolutely nothing to do with being in the right or even having valid points. Winning a debate is all about knowing when to press your opponent and getting good at the Chewbacca defense. As much as you study your side of the issue, you should study your opponents so that you can predict his moves and outgun him. And if you're reading between the lines, you now know why lawyers make "better" politicians. | ||
|
Mortality
United States4790 Posts
On March 31 2010 11:48 Bibbit wrote: Lawyers are are actually like trained in the art of not being an idiot. Obviously engineers are really smart as well but like the entire purpose of a lawyer is to not completely drop the ball. Congratulations on successfully being duped by like every politician ever. What lawyers are good at is making it look like they aren't being an idiot even when they are. | ||
|
lazz
Australia3119 Posts
politics is all about being good looking, being charismatic, and not minding lieing through your teeth the profession of benig a lawyer is more in line with these things ^^^^ while being an engineer is more about analysis and actually solving shit, stuff you dont need for politics | ||
|
Bibbit
Canada5377 Posts
On March 31 2010 11:53 Mortality wrote: Congratulations on successfully being duped by like every politician ever. What lawyers are good at is making it look like they aren't being an idiot even when they are. Well if you're debating for why lawyers are good, you probably shouldn't mention that.  But its definitely true enough and anyone making the argument that I said would need to be prepared for what you said. Edit: To lazz, what you said is definitely true for how politics actually works. But what I believe the OP is concerned with is whether engineers would actually be better hypothetically (like how well they would represent the people/ pass actually good rather than well liked laws) | ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
yay economics | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
Edit: Jibba that article is very interesting and absorbing thanks for sharing | ||
|
illu
Canada2531 Posts
| ||
|
DefMatrixUltra
Canada1992 Posts
| ||
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
In the world of politics, the "ideal" politician is one who makes the right choice on any issue regardless of the popularity of that choice. Since the definition of "competent" is "having requisite or adequate ability or qualities," we can say that a competent politician is one who does the right thing. But though the ideal politician may make unpopular but right choices, in the real world, making unpopular choices makes for short-lived terms in office. By the very definition of what an ideal politician is, there should be no "good" politician in office for more than one term! A politician who wants to make the right choices but who feels constrained by an approaching election must make difficult choices about what good causes to sacrifice in order to stay in office and be able to do any good at all. Either that, or the politician must convince his constituency that the choices he made are best for the country/state/district. Clearly, a lawyer would be able to handle both aspects above better than an engineer. | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36375 Posts
| ||
|
meaculpa
United States119 Posts
I anticipate your opponents will just counter with stereotypes like 'engineers are smarter' and 'lawyers are crooked and evil'. If they go for something "look at how politicians are awful, this is because they're lawyers" then you will lose the debate simply because your classmates aren't very smart. But you can still quip in about how their team proves your point because a real engineer would be aware of basic statistical facts about samples and would not have made the argument they just did. But then he would have lost if he didn't make that argument, thus deceitful politics triumphs. You'll still lose though because your class thinks that if a 99% accurate lie detector says you lied when you denied being a rapist, then there is a 99% you are one. P.S. Herbert Hoover was an engineer. | ||
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21243 Posts
China, in contrast, has many of its top leaders with science/engineering degrees. The president, Hu Jintao, has a hydraulic engineer degree, and I believe Wen Jiabao, the premier, has a geology/earth science postdoctorate degree. Their predecessors, Jiang Zemin and Zhu Rongji, were both electrical engineers. Xi Jinping, China's current heir-apparent, is a chemical engineer. | ||
|
50bani
Romania480 Posts
What is a Politician? Define this term thoroughly. Are we considering politics as the art/science of getting votes to attain office only, or execution in office on top of that as well? Hope this helps you start. | ||
|
Kim_Hyun_Han
706 Posts
| ||
|
natturner
342 Posts
yea, i think an important part to this debate is defining what a "politician" is and what "competent" means. and then see how a lawyer and an engineer fit with that definition. | ||
| ||
