The Official TL Policy Debate thread - Page 8

On February 17 2012 15:46 Felnar wrote:


And my argument is the needs and strengths of policy in terms of debate as a game, and academic event outweigh those of LD from my experience which is on a highschool circuit. I also presented it as an opinion, but I don't think i'd go so far as to say it was absurd. Yes we could have a whold debate on the merits of either and especially the merits of communication vs information. But policy is also a team event requires and develops research, logic, comprehension and critical thinking to a level beyond that of LD.

You also have a resolution that lasts year round. Which means you have a lot more time to not only gather more information and subsuquently more sheer knowledge on the topic and arguments your debating, but also get to redebate the same debates differently helping you use prior experience to find new ways to alter your arguments. Much like if SC2 decided to throw new units or buildings and take old ones away every season, it would make for interesting and fun gameplay but ultimately lose out on the possiblities that the game staying static over a long peroid of time can offer. i.e. refined builds, deeper comprehension of the game ect ect..

I don't disagree with you LD has a place, has value, is an intelligent and well designed form of debate. The thing I love most about LD is the fact that framework of the case is also used to define the framework of the round and it comes down to these theoretical or philisophical discussion of what is the most logical or moral model to prefer when discussing topics.. but if i ever go back into coaching i will teach my kids policy.

.

On February 17 2012 16:03 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:


First, the comment of policy being better "as a game" doesn't make sense, that literally drops to the level of apples and oranges; as games, their value is contingent upon subjective "fun" [in the competitive sense, and both have the same competitive structure]. It'd be like arguing whether playing zerg or terran is more fun.

As to the educational value, your effort at weighing analysis is pointless because the benefits are non-quantifiable and non-falsifiable, hence my claim that any attempt at saying one is better than the other is absurd. Additionally, the only unique distinction between policy and LD [at least that you draw here] is the year-round topic versus revolving topics. Yet, the only educational advantage this has among those you cite ("research, logic, comprehension and critical thinking") is to that of research. First, as nice as it is to learn about current events, true education is about shaping processes of thinking, not merely filling in the brain with content, as A: that memory will naturally fade anyways, and B: the process of thinking has a fundamentally greater magnitude in affecting a person's conscious awareness in treating all forms of knowledge for the rest of their life. In fact, LD arguably benefits the process of thinking more by having a less stable framework of debate, as the offense-defense paradigm is not assumed, meaning that the greater flexibility and analysis of this more fundamental level forces people to think in a more critical sense by questioning basic assumptions rather than operating on plain facts built on those implicit ideas. Second, the breadth versus depth debate is a false dichotomy. In reality, every plan and K creates its own specific topic, with its own realm of analysis and research to be performed, and likewise in LD. Sure, there are tons of plans available in policy, but there are also tons of different cases in LD, multiplied by the number of topics [as well as the fact that there are independent cases for both affs and negs]. Add that to the fact that the Jan-Feb topic is also used for TOC, you essentially have a half-year-long topic mixed in with all the other topics, so the cumulative time of research for the different topics arguably is longer than that of policy. Finally, the only real difference is in the amount of time spent in research, which has zero uniqueness to policy.

Now, I'm not actually arguing that LD > policy, it's just force of habit that has me making offense-oriented arguments for my side . In reality, the impossibility of any real comparison point is the most straightforward and undeniable.

On February 17 2012 15:59 Felnar wrote:
I agree but I value to merits that the high level of policy debate incorporates over those of LD. LD debate is in no way dumber, worse or any other demeaning adjective to that of policy debate and I wouldn't want to imply anything like that.

On February 17 2012 16:02 Mortality wrote:
Oh... I thought this thread was going to be about debating the policies of TLnet. Was eager to see who could incite the ban hammer to drop. Never mind.

Well, carry on.

On February 17 2012 17:37 Wrongspeedy wrote:


Hahhaahh I thought that at first too. It was like "ooooo spicy"

On February 20 2012 00:56 BaconofWar wrote:
Hey guys, how has harvard been going for any of you who are attending?

On February 20 2012 15:45 NationInArms wrote:


Lol, everyone to busy at Harvard to reply. I have a few friends there too, they're the top in their state but it's going to be a tough fight.