Challenge Match: Frankidealist35 vs antar: Government Sponsored Ignorance?

page: 1
5

log in

join

posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
The topic for this debate is: "The Dumbing Down Of America Is Not The Result Of Government Intention"

Frankidealist35 will be arguing the pro position and will open the debate.
antar will argue the con position.

Each debater will have one opening statement each. This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each. There will then be one closing statement each and no rebuttal.

There is a 10,000 character limit per post.

Any character count in excess of 10,000 will be deleted prior to the judging process.

Editing is strictly forbidden. For reasons of time, mod edits should not be expected except in critical situations.

Opening and closing statements must not contain any images and must have no more than 3 references.

Excluding both the opening and closing statements, only two images and no more than 5 references can be included for each post. Each individual post may contain up to 10 sentences of external source material, totaled from all external sources.

Links to multiple pages within a single domain count as 1 reference but there is a maximum of 3 individual links per reference, then further links from that domain count as a new reference. Excess quotes and excess links will be removed before judging.

The Socratic Debate Rule is in effect. Each debater may ask up to 5 questions in each post, except for in closing statements- no questions are permitted in closing statements. These questions should be clearly labeled as "Question 1, Question 2, etc.

When asked a question, a debater must give a straight forward answer in his next post. Explanations and qualifications to an answer are acceptable, but must be preceded by a direct answer.

This Is The Time Limit Policy:
Each debater must post within 24 hours of the timestamp on the last post. If your opponent is late, you may post immediately without waiting for an announcement of turn forfeiture. If you are late, you may post late, unless your opponent has already posted.

Each debater is entitled to one extension of 24 hours. The request should be posted in this thread and is automatically granted- the 24 hour extension begins at the expiration of the previous deadline, not at the time of the extension request.

In the unlikely event that tardiness results in simultaneous posting by both debaters, the late post will be deleted unless it appears in its proper order in the thread.

Judging will be done by a panel of anonymous judges. After each debate is completed it will be locked and the judges will begin making their decision. One of the debate forum moderators will then make a final post announcing the winner.

**This Debate Will Begin On Tuesday, February 3rd**




posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I will be arguing on the position that I do not believe that the government causes ignorance. First, let me define what I believe to be ignorant. Ignorance is ignoring the facts of a given situation. I will talk about different situations where people are ignorant and I hope to show why they are ignorant because of their social conditions and not because of something unseen.

People do not become ignorant because of the government. I feel that they become ignorant because the people around them are ignorant of what’s going on, and, that they are ignorant of all of the different facets that make up the world. Government is not the cause of the ignorance. I believe the cause goes far beyond government. I hope that in my argument that I prove that ignorance is nonetheless not caused by our own government—but of several different reasons—of our own stereotypes we have of others, of our own failing education system, from all of these distractions we have around us (like Hollywood movies and our favorite TV shows), the mass media, because of people having to go to work. I believe that it’s part of our culture to deny truth and to deny reality. I’ll admit, that a portion of the ignorance people show is because of what politicians say and them blindly believing it—but I’m not going to buy that argument right now because look at George W Bush—his approval rating was 32%-- it seems like not too many people believed in what he was doing, or, blindly believed his statements.

I believe that a large portion of the ignorance is caused by the fact that people have something called a job. Having a job is a great way to keep people enslaved I guess. I mean, they’re not really enslaved because they are allowed to do what they want. But, in reality when you think about it—they’re kept from the real truths about what underlie within the system when they do their job—they don’t have the time for political stuff and they don’t have the time to see what the government is doing to them because they aren’t aware of it because they have so much other stuff to do. When people come back from work they are exhausted. All they want to do is television. They would rather watch television than to read a book. I want to point out this shocking statistic about the United States of America. People watch an average of 4.5 hours of television per day (www.answerbag.com... ). It’s rather shocking. According to this one survey, unhappy people tend to watch television more.

'TV doesn't really seem to satisfy people over the long haul the way that social involvement or reading a newspaper does,' says researcher John P. Robinson. 'It's more passive and may provide escape — especially when the news is as depressing as the economy itself. The data suggest to us that the TV habit may offer short-run pleasure at the expense of long-term malaise.' Unhappy people also liked their TV more:
science.slashdot.org.../11/15/192222 . I do not believe that the government is responsible for that. I believe that these corporations just want our attention and that the television people are no different. They want our attention just as much as the others. I think the unfortunate thing is that the television people keep the unhappy people under their control by showing all of those junk shows like American Idol, Lost, and a few other shows that keep them satisfied. These unhappy people are kept happy because of these shows on television, I guess, that makes them less wanting to rebel because it makes them more passive. It also makes them less critical thinkers. It also erodes at their awareness. If they keep showing escapist behavior all the time like that they’ll never be aware of what’s going on.

I’ll admit that part of the ignorance comes from the campaign season. But, does this come from the government or is it part of our society? It depends on whether you see what happened during the election as a conspiracy to rile people up to support Barack Obama. I think people were just wanting a change. I think the people who became ignorant of Barack Obama and John McCain did not become ignorant of the two of them because of the government. I felt the mass media played a huge role in the brainwashing of the mass population to get them to support both candidates as much as they did. Bloggers also played a role in this. People were just not being themselves. They became ignorant for a while. I would rather blame the MSM more than the government here for the ignorance. I will later show throughout my argument how the mainstream media uses different kind of rhetoric to keep people thinking in partisan ways. They want partisanship—it’s good for their viewership. MSNBC and Fox News don’t care about what people think of them—they just want the ratings. What better way to do that than to attract the ignorant people of the Democratic and the Republican party? I will also show throughout my argument how the mainstream media rallies for public support of the war. I do not believe that the government is directly responsible for this. I believe that the MSM plays off the ignorance people have.

I think that a lot of our ignorance comes from Hollywood movies, TV shows, and stereotypes we have. I’m not talking about political ignorance here—well in a way I am. But, when you think about it—people are kept in the dark because it’s natural for people to have stereotypes of other people and things. I believe that television and movies keeps people in the dark about the reality of certain things. There are so many movies on aliens and UFOs while yes—more people are likely to believe they’re out there- but I doubt that many of those people would believe me if I told them about all of the incidents in Stephenville, Texas. I do not believe people would be able to truly understand the autocracies that Hitler committed. I feel that the way the MSM portrays him is less bad than how he actually is. They are ignorant of the experiment he carried out.

What about school? Teachers who teach in school only teach the way they know how to. It is a result of our failed education system. Teachers don’t learn all they need to teach and thus are kept with keeping telling people the same lies, not telling people all sides of a history, or only teaching people one specific aspect of something—not explaining things well, etc. There aren’t that many good teachers in public high-schools. Yes- people learn—but the fact that people lose interest in the subject after they take the class is proof that teachers aren’t that good at teaching their subject in primary education. And what about their teaching methods? I would argue that it is the teaching methods of teachers in primary education that keeps people ignorant. People expect life to be like rote learning. They just do the same thing every time because that’s how they learn to get the right answer. They just repeat. Is this government caused? No. Teachers are in control of their own actions and if they don’t know how to teach a kid that’s their fault. If they don’t teach a kid how to think critically I do not believe that is the fault of the government although they may capitalize on less educated people. I would argue that it is the fault of the teachers themselves.

Lastly, I believe that lots of people are kept ignorant because of work and other distractions around them. They never see the truth because it is blinded from them. The moment people become a sheep, or, shall I say, the moment people become braindead, is the moment they lose their chance at ever waking up. These people just like going with the flow. They like doing what they’re told. They don’t disobey. People supposedly don’t have the time to. They are satisfied with their movies and their MP3 players. They are satisfied with how society is. These types of people are not kept ignorant from the government but because of their own lives they live. I do believe that if they were showed how their lives could be better I bet they would take actions to do so. If these people were shown the facts about what our government has been doing to us the last 50 years or so I believe that these people would start to take action. I think that the 2008 election was a start. People showed they wanted a change. Now that needs to happen more often and far more frequently.

So, I believe that the government doesn’t sponsor ignorance. I think they merely just take advantage of it. As a result of all the ignorance they are able to make their decisions secretly unbeknownst to the masses. That is why they are able to do what they want to do. But I do not believe the government wants a society of non-critical thinkers and I do not believe that the government is at fault. I believe it is the fault of the collective society as a whole.


Allow me to ask my Socratic question #1:
If it is the government's fault that people are ignorant-- what are they doing to keep us ignorant-- and just how much influence do they have?



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Due to confusion regarding the beginning of this debate, antar's 24 hour time limit will begin from the time stamp of this post.

Frankidealist35 will gain an extra 24 hour extension to use, or not, at his discretion.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Socratic question number one:

If it is the governments fault that people are ignorant what are they doing to keep us ignorant and just how much influence do they have?


I would like to begin by thanking frankidealist for inviting me to debate this incredibly relevant topic.


To understand the question we first have to look toward the legislative branch of our government and how it interacts with laws, rules and regulations in today's society to mold and shape the outcomes of its responsibility towards the educational processes, health, environmental, nutrition and over well being of the individual.

It is appropriate to understand the bureaucracy of the legislative branch and how it can and does often become the determining factor in whether or not even the best laid plans become fixed in a quagmire of misrepresentation for the final disposition of the rules and regulations which affect the overall well being of the individual.

To ask as a blanketed term if it is the governments fault that our educational systems which were once known as the highest ranking in the world are in fact solely responsible for the downtrend, then the simple answer would have to be yes, it most certainly has allowed the bureaucratic deficiency to lead the current state of decline.

We will take a more in depth look at this further on in the debate.

Next in order to the education decline is the regulatory statutes allowable today which have been proven in a multitude of tests to be not only harmful to the environment and in case studies livestock, but just as dangerous if not more so to humans in the long term.

Practices such citywide fluoridation and elementary school programs which advocate fluoride rinses once a week without appropriate studies to discover the ill affects to developing children.

Vaccines are also a serious consideration as it is a known factor in the death and disablement of many children. Vaccines known to contain Mercury an extremely toxic substance has been discovered and yet was continued to be allowed use as the bureaucrats drug their feet even after proof was amply provided.

Also on the rise and worthy of consideration under the legislative branch would be disabilities such as ADHD, autism, speech defects and mental illness, even homelessness. All play a major role in statistics nationwide and the percentages are astounding in their growing numbers in just a brief period within recent history.

Moving along to environmental and nutritional issues which practically speak for themselves as legislators allow irradiated products onto the store shelves, pesticides are sprayed on fruits and vegetables and the frightening factors of genetically altered seeds begin to take precedence over organic and natural available in unlimited quantities.

The number of inner city children with lung diseases such as asthma and RSV have become almost the norm in many states due to lack of environmentally safe practices in both industrial waste and manufacturing to automobile regulations which the United States also falls substantially behind other countries presently.

And finally we need to look at educational funding and programs as a true road map in the dumbing down of the American youth, all fall under bureaucratic rules, regulation and law.

It is never the sole responsibility of the schools public and or private to provide the rich environment for a love of higher learning, and the discipline it takes to create the next Einstein or Picasso, yet in far too many schools the emphasis is on the wrong track to actually create an environment of interest for the students and instead forces the schools to base their curriculum on what will help raise the most governmental funding.

In this debate I will attempt to show how the responsibility does indeed fall on the government for the de evolution of the human psychological, physical and biological abilities and place the blame squarely in their hands where it belongs.

My Socratic question for you is quite simple:

How can the Dumbing down of the American people not be the responibility of the fradulent and greedy act of a deplorable and corrupt governing body?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Antar, I am going to use the 24 hour extension as has been granted to me by MemoryShock.

I will respond to your post by tomorrow evening.



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 01:44 PM
link   

I would like to begin by thanking frankidealist for inviting me to debate this incredibly relevant topic.
To ask as a blanketed term if it is the governments fault that our educational systems which were once known as the highest ranking in the world are in fact solely responsible for the downtrend, then the simple answer would have to be yes, it most certainly has allowed the bureaucratic deficiency to lead the current state of decline.

We will take a more in depth look at this further on in the debate.

Alright. Let me answer that first. I do not believe that all of it is just the cause of the government but of other corporations and other businesses that are outside of governmental control. I would believe that there are also several other factors involved. I think that part of it is that a lot of people feel self-defeated, like, nothing they do can help them because a computer job that they could have had is out there in India. People here have to work more competitively than ever before just to get a good paying job. Ignoring the facts won’t help. I will point out key issues with why it is getting harder and harder to get a higher paying job and a job that people like to do at a living, and, I will point out other factors that make it harder for people to learn. It’s partially about poverty issues. Areas where people are more poor there will likely be higher rates of crime. Due to the fact that the job market is becoming ridiculously competitive they are likely to not be able to all find a job they want, so, as a return, they feel defeated. Other factors include their friends, socialization, stereotypes of learning, the failed education system, and just lack of incentive to learn. I will prove how there are several other factors other than our government that is keeping people dumbed down and ignorant.


Next in order to the education decline is the regulatory statutes allowable today which have been proven in a multitude of tests to be not only harmful to the environment and in case studies livestock, but just as dangerous if not more so to humans in the long term.

Practices such citywide fluoridation and elementary school programs which advocate fluoride rinses once a week without appropriate studies to discover the ill affects to developing children.

Vaccines are also a serious consideration as it is a known factor in the death and disablement of many children. Vaccines known to contain Mercury an extremely toxic substance has been discovered and yet was continued to be allowed use as the bureaucrats drug their feet even after proof was amply provided.

I do not doubt that. I think people need to eat less processed foods myself. I believe that people are becoming too fat. I believe that part of the reason why these children are getting so many learning disorders and have so many disorders as they do now is because of what they eat. It’s easier for parents to buy unhealthy food than it is for them to buy healthy food. You know the phrase you are what you eat? I would say that if one eats lots of candies per day then it is likely for them to become hyper and get ADHD and these other disorders as a result.


Also on the rise and worthy of consideration under the legislative branch would be disabilities such as ADHD, autism, speech defects and mental illness, even homelessness. All play a major role in statistics nationwide and the percentages are astounding in their growing numbers in just a brief period within recent history.

I agree. But I don’t believe that the government is the cause of that. I would argue that this has more greater causes. Something that lies beyond government control.


Moving along to environmental and nutritional issues which practically speak for themselves as legislators allow irradiated products onto the store shelves, pesticides are sprayed on fruits and vegetables and the frightening factors of genetically altered seeds begin to take precedence over organic and natural available in unlimited quantities.

I’m usually against government regulation but here I would agree with you. There needs to be more regulation with the food industry. Everything needs to be checked before they get shipped to grocery stores. I’m getting as tired as the person on the street about all of these food scares going on. They need to do a better job on that.


The number of inner city children with lung diseases such as asthma and RSV have become almost the norm in many states due to lack of environmentally safe practices in both industrial waste and manufacturing to automobile regulations which the United States also falls substantially behind other countries presently.

I would agree. But that isn’t the government’s fault. Yes, the government needs to regulate industry to make it more environmentally friendly but I would believe that these industries could be capable of doing that themselves. But since they aren’t. I agree with you on that.


And finally we need to look at educational funding and programs as a true road map in the dumbing down of the American youth, all fall under bureaucratic rules, regulation and law.

It is never the sole responsibility of the schools public and or private to provide the rich environment for a love of higher learning, and the discipline it takes to create the next Einstein or Picasso, yet in far too many schools the emphasis is on the wrong track to actually create an environment of interest for the students and instead forces the schools to base their curriculum on what will help raise the most governmental funding.

I would argue that it’s not curriculum that is why the education system is failing. It’s all about the perception people have of learning. People seem to think that if “oh if we just modernize schools more people would learn better” or they seem to think “we have to make schools more fun for the students” or stuff like “we need to make schools easier. We also need to pay children to do well. We need to pay teachers more.” But I believe that more money is not the answer. YES, some money needs to be spent… but I take a conservative stance I guess on this. I believe that the education system needs to be changed not with more laws or more money or more intervention, but, they need to make the environment more learning friendly. I went to a private school for High-School and I got a pretty good education. I can see why people would say that people who go to private schools are elitest. They think that they’re going to a school that they want to go to and that they wouldn’t do well in a public school environment. I however take a different stance. I believe that it’s not that people aren’t learning things that interest them. I believe that the current environment of public schools bores students to the point where they lose their interests of learning and that’s where rote learning comes to play. They don’t think they just do. I believe the whole environment of public school systems need to be changed for the better. More quality teachers, smaller classrooms, more help when people need it are all things that everyone should have access to—not just people with special needs or people who go to private schools.


In this debate I will attempt to show how the responsibility does indeed fall on the government for the de evolution of the human psychological, physical and biological abilities and place the blame squarely in their hands where it belongs.

Okay then. I will argue that it is natural for people to lose interest in learning and I will hopefully attempt to show that not all hope is lost, and, I will show through my argument how one can get people more interested in learning.



My Socratic question for you is quite simple:

How can the Dumbing down of the American people not be the responibility of the fradulent and greedy act of a deplorable and corrupt governing body?

I am not arguing that the government does not cause ANY of the ignorance. I however am arguing that the government is NOT the sole cause of all of this. It has to do with multinational corporations sending jobs overseas, the mass media keeping America dumb and keeping people here thinking in partisan terms and about tabloid news. It has to do with all of this hogwash propaganda from both parties. It has to do with campaign seasons and how the media turns rational people into irrational people very fast. It has to do with stereotypes where people think that being smart is nerdy. It also has to do with the fact that people aren’t reading. Okay, more people are reading, but look at this statistic.


At the same time the survey found that the proportion of adults who said they had read any kind of a book, fiction or nonfiction, that was not required for work or school actually declined slightly since 2002, to 54.3 percent from 56.6 percent.

www.nytimes.com...
That’s like 40 percent of the people in our country… and they haven’t read books.
I do not believe the government is fully responsible for this. I don't think any one person or thing should take the blame for this.

My Socratic question #2: Just what causes people to not want to read? I believe that reading gets people to be more critical thinkers. People say they don't have the time to do it. They may lose interest in reading while in school. But, if you believe the government is the fault for this, what have they done, and, if so, why are they doing this?



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Your Socratic question #2:

Just what causes people to not want to read? I believe that
reading gets people to be more critical thinkers.
People say they don't have the time to do it. They
may loose interest in reading while in school. But, if you believe
the government is the fault for this, what have they done, and, if so, why are they doing this?


I have to disagree to an extent about people not wanting to read.
The majority of adults are reading more now than ever with the introduction of the WWW, E-mail and E-books which are a private and convenient way to gain access to reading materials for many fast paced people with little time or even money as e books are often free to low cost.

When we begin to look at the current direction of children loosing their interest in reading we 'have' to blame government sponsored agendas. The no child left behind program is a perfect example.

If schools want to keep their funding, they have to have a certain amount of children in specialized reading programs and even summer school, when once that was solely for children who were not going to pass on to the next grade level.

Often smaller schools have no choice but to use the elementary computers for the disabled and developmentally challenged.
This sets the stage for the children of exceptional ability to be left behind. And this is the most important point to note, that the government sponsored programs create mediocrity by rewarding the challenged and displacing the needs and rewards of the exceptional students.

This is not a mistake or some strange mishap from an attempt to help the challenged reach to higher heights. This is a blatant attempt by our government to force schools into a state below the standards of acceptability. The brightest students can only take a few years of the dull
curriculum which is designed to challenge only the lowest levels.They are simply teaching dead subjects which have no place in the future of a technologically advanced civilization and in so doing are forcing children to loose interest from the first few years.

The entire educational process needs to rise to the challenges of the 21st century and if we took only a small portion of the ridiculous amounts of money used on the frivolous and the bailouts, can you imagine
how exciting the primary years could become for students?

I was discussing this debate with my Doctor today and he absolutely
believes that the government is responsible for the dumbing down of the American public.

He spoke about higher education and how the rewards system is set up and gave a great example I will share with you.

He said take for instance an Opthamologist, that if he was the best in his
profession and top in his class, at one time his pay would reflect that. But now with the socialization of his specialized field, he gets paid the same as the guy who graduated at the bottom of the class, or the guy that is just a poor Opthamologist with a bad track record or reputation.

He admitted that the rewards system is set up to create the same defeat as has happened in the middle and high school systems and that even though we still are considered to have some of the best colleges in the world, that soon that will also be changing.

He went on to talk about how many of the hospitals are desperate for new Doctors and yet why if you are truly intelligent, bright would you become a doctor with all of the pressure from malpractice, lawsuits, and a medium income after taxes and insurance companies get theirs?

Many of the brightest are no longer becoming specialists, rather becoming Wall street tycoons or studying other professions which have
the potential to make money.

So in other words if you study very hard, become a professional
the government rewards you with stiff taxes, insurance and low wages. The more you make the more they want.

So through regulations imposed by the government, the rewards system does nothing to reward the top of the class, the best in their fields, it does not encourage individuals to reach for excellence.

You ask why they are doing this? They cannot control the individual, the free thinker. They can and do reward mediocrity.

My second Socratic question to you:

If the government is responsible for the health and well being of the population, then why is it they continue to support the big pharacutical companies and make every attempt to ban alternative
health practices including attempts at making natural medicine and vitamins illegal?

Alternately, how does it help to raise the consciousness and mental health of children and individuals to be placed in record numbers on drugs that have serious known side affects? And how can this be anything but an action taken towards the dumbing down of America?

Edit for italics tag.

[edit on 7-2-2009 by MemoryShock]



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
Your Socratic question #2:
I have to disagree to an extent about people not wanting to read.
The majority of adults are reading more now than ever with the introduction of the WWW, E-mail and E-books which are a private and convenient way to gain access to reading materials for many fast paced people with little time or even money as e books are often free to low cost.

That's for ADULTS. Not children. We need to motivate children to read. Learning starts at a young age. Children need to be interested in reading. Most children would probably just dismiss learning as boring. We need to get them interested in literature to get them thinking.


When we begin to look at the current direction of children loosing their interest in reading we 'have' to blame government sponsored agendas. The no child left behind program is a perfect example.



If schools want to keep their funding, they have to have a certain amount of children in specialized reading programs and even summer school, when once that was solely for children who were not going to pass on to the next grade level.
That looks good on paper. But it is not government who should be required to get people interested in reading. If we as a nation have failed at something (like getting people to read) then it is our fault. Not the government's.


Often smaller schools have no choice but to use the elementary computers for the disabled and developmentally challenged.
This sets the stage for the children of exceptional ability to be left behind. And this is the most important point to note, that the government sponsored programs create mediocrity by rewarding the challenged and displacing the needs and rewards of the exceptional students.

Wait, did you just say that the government shouldn't reward the challenged students? Exceptional students should be able to do well in school without much additional help. Here I would have to disagree with you. Challenged people need more help. I used to have ADHD when I was a child and it was impossible for me to focus in school. I would have loved to have gotten rewarded for doing something good. People who are more challenged need the most help because they just need a little push.


This is not a mistake or some strange mishap from an attempt to help the challenged reach to higher heights. This is a blatant attempt by our government to force schools into a state below the standards of acceptability. The brightest students can only take a few years of the dull
curriculum which is designed to challenge only the lowest levels.They are simply teaching dead subjects which have no place in the future of a technologically advanced civilization and in so doing are forcing children to loose interest from the first few years.
]
Here I would have to disagree with you. The government isn't the problem here. Teachers have the most power in this respect. If teachers gathered in large numbers they could probably get the curriculum changed. Teachers aren't ignorant. It's just that a lot of teachers aren't that good. A teacher can be not qualified even when they say they are... they might not know enough to teach the class. I don't think it's the subjects that are disinteresting. I think that it's the lack of interest in learning.


The entire educational process needs to rise to the challenges of the 21st century and if we took only a small portion of the ridiculous amounts of money used on the frivolous and the bailouts, can you imagine
how exciting the primary years could become for students?

Actually, did you hear that the Senate Republicans asked to nix half of the funding of the bailout money that was directed to education? But, I stand by my stance that money won't help solve the problem with education. We need to get people motivated to do well in school and to motivate them to learn. Give them a reason to succeed.


I He said take for instance an Opthamologist, that if he was the best in his
profession and top in his class, at one time his pay would reflect that. But now with the socialization of his specialized field, he gets paid the same as the guy who graduated at the bottom of the class, or the guy that is just a poor Opthamologist with a bad track record or reputation.

He admitted that the rewards system is set up to create the same defeat as has happened in the middle and high school systems and that even though we still are considered to have some of the best colleges in the world, that soon that will also be changing.

I disagree. I don't see how giving rewards to people who do better on things and not giving rewards to people who do less well will make things better. I don't think things look that way. The reward system is the fault of the people who run the schools. It is not the fault of the government.


He went on to talk about how many of the hospitals are desperate for new Doctors and yet why if you are truly intelligent, bright would you become a doctor with all of the pressure from malpractice, lawsuits, and a medium income after taxes and insurance companies get theirs?

Many of the brightest are no longer becoming specialists, rather becoming Wall street tycoons or studying other professions which have
the potential to make money.

I see.



So through regulations imposed by the government, the rewards system does nothing to reward the top of the class, the best in their fields, it does not encourage individuals to reach for excellence.

You ask why they are doing this? They cannot control the individual, the free thinker. They can and do reward mediocrity.

Throwing money at the problem doesn't solve the problem. Like I said, we need to change the system from within! Government doesn't have much control over what goes on.


My second Socratic question to you:

If the government is responsible for the health and well being of the population, then why is it they continue to support the big pharacutical companies and make every attempt to ban alternative
health practices including attempts at making natural medicine and vitamins illegal?

I don't see how the second half of the question has to do with our debate because we're discussing ignorance... but I'm going to take the devil's advocate position. Since I'm not familiar with this whole thing I have to ask how natural medicine would be any better than medicine or how alternative medicine would be better. If you had a choice between a prayer and a pill that could potentially make your pain go away what would you do?


Alternately, how does it help to raise the consciousness and mental health of children and individuals to be placed in record numbers on drugs that have serious known side affects? And how can this be anything but an action taken towards the dumbing down of America?

Raise the consciousness? We don't need to raise the consciousness of the children. We need to change their consciousness and encourage them to be a functional member of society. I don't think our government envisioned and planned for a society much like that of the bookBrave New World by Aldeous Huxley. I don't think the government intended for that.

In my next post I will attempt to prove why the government is not the fault for people not being able to get jobs in specialized fields or expertise. I found this website which has information, but due to the circumstances of me being near the end of my post, I shall omit the relevant data to prove my claims and just provide a description of what outsourcing is, and then, I shall ask my #3 socratic question.


So, what is offshoring? Offshoring is a type of outsourcing. Offshoring simply means having the outsourced business functions done in another country. Frequently, work is offshored in order to reduce labor expenses. Other times, the reasons for offshoring are strategic -- to enter new markets, to tap talent currently unavailable domestically or to overcome regulations that prevent specific activities domestically

www.sourcingmag.com...
Do you really believe that people of this nation are stupid? People certainly might not be that smart and they might be kept ignorant from fast food restaraunts, the media, or Hollywood, but, how can we improve our economy and our way of life if our best jobs are getting shipped overseas? Our politicians talk of us as not wanting the hard jobs. They say that Mexicans do better work than us. They say that we've lost our competitive edge. But people to fail to look at the real problem. Our potential is being outsourced and with it our creative spirit, our intelligence, our ingenuity, and everything which makes our country great. So my socratic question #3 is:
How can we convince these multinational corporations to be on our side again? I think it's a shame that these corporations that got their start in our nation are now working against us to destroy us. So what can we do to get them back on our side?



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Your 3rd Socratic Question:

How can we convince these multinational corporations to be on
our side again? I think it's a shame that these
corporations that got their start in our nation are now working against
us to destroy us. So what can we do to get them back on our side?


Your question actually poses a debate unto itself. However I will answer as best as possible in short.

When we bring the educational system back up to the levels which create an atmosphere of solid rewards to the schools which strive for higher excellence instead of funding only those schools which programs concentrate solely on the challenged students, we will begin to take the first steps in reversing the trends toward popping out students with the mediocre trade school mentality and bring back to our nations the ability to foster the most brilliant minds ready and willing to accept the challenges of the future.

Public schools through government regulations, rules and funding requirements have taken the role of complete power over the teachers, students as well as the parents and in doing so are setting up the lower standards which lead the masses into the false sense of helplessness in ones individual direction not only in education but life in general.

To empower the student you do not use tactics such as the no child left behind programs which have each student read at least 400 minutes per week starting in grade 1. It becomes a drudgery, a hastle and from the beginning takes the fun out of reading.

Take my son for example, he was reading long before kindergarten, and yet once he hit first grade and was pressured into reading the same books at home he had always loved, and putting his time reading into a log, he very quickly lost interest in those same favorites because of the control over something he loved that he was good at.

Also many of the kids that showed no sign of advanced ability, intelligence, would take all of the rewards for having supposedly read 6 or 8 hundred minutes a week. My son said when they read out loud you could tell they had not read that many books in the time frame, impossible! Yet they were rewarded just the same. He refused to cheat and often fell under the minimum minutes required or simply did not write his reading time down. Subsequently his grades suffered. And with this broken spirit his love of simply picking up a book to read just for the sheer joy of it.

Let us move on to the reasons people are so easily controlled. Next to the sub par educational system is health and nutrition regulated and controlled by the Government.

Genetically modified organisms (GMO) uses molecular biology technology to enhance rapid growth, resistance to disease and desired affects to eventually rule over factors such as drought resistance and mass production and the ability to create their own pesticide from within.

We already know that the pollens blown in the wind from these GMO's spreads to other plants and even have been known to kill the Monarch butterfly and their caterpillars. With the loss of the honey bee one must ask if it is the GMOs which are responsible.

Humans are also susceptible to the toxic introductions of GMOs. Allergens have reached an all time high in children world wide and have been attributed to peanuts and other foods.

Yet how many GMOs are being used under the guise of other more healthy alternatives which are directly responsible for this incredibly significant rise?

EPA FDA and USDA all have a responsibility. Yet they continue to side with the industrialized future for all human beings regardless of consequence or adequate testing.

The Prince of Whales seems to be a true voice of reason for the people in this most critical time of decission making about GMOs and their place in the future. When asked about GMOs here are some excerpts from his honest answers:



1. Do we need GM food in this country?

On the basis of what we have seen so far, we don't appear to need it at all. The benefits, such as there are, seem to be limited to the people who own the technology and the people who farm on an industrialised scale. We are constantly told that this technology may have huge benefits for the future. Well, perhaps. But we have all heard claims like that before
and they don't always come true in the long run - look at the case of antibiotic growth promoters in animal feedstuff...

2. Is GM food safe for us to eat?

There is certainly no evidence to the contrary. But how much evidence do we have? And are we looking at the right things? The major decisions about what can be grown and what can be sold are taken on the basis of studying what is known about the original plant, comparing it to the genetically modified variety, and then deciding whether the two
are 'substantially equivalent'. But is it enough to look only at what is already known? Isn't there at least a possibility that the new crops (particularly those that have been made resistant to antibiotics) will behave in unexpected ways, producing toxic or allergic reactions? Only
independent scientific research, over a long period, can provide the final answers.

3. What sort of world do we want to live in?

This is the biggest question of all. I raise it because the capacity of GM technology to change our world has brought us to a crossroads of fundamental importance. Are we going to allow the industrialisation of Life itself, redesigning the natural world for the sake of convenience and embarking on an Orwellian future? And, if we do, will there eventually be
a price to pay? Or should we be adopting a gentler, more considered approach, seeking always to work with the grain of Nature in making better, more sustainable use of what we have, for the long-term benefit of mankind as a whole? The answer is important. It will affect far more than the food we eat; it will determine the sort of world we, and our children, inhabit.


www.princeofwales.gov.uk...

As posed in my opening statement it is the governments responsibility to to create a trust between the organizations which are in place to promote our overall health and well being of the individual and not give in to the industrialized state which looks only to the monetary value of our shared potential.

GMO's are only the tip of the ice when looking into the reasons behind the general dumbing down of the individual. Other issues include tainted vaccines, mercury in fillings, fluoride in drinking water, lead in older schools and dwellings.

Confusion for the consumer with products available to the general public which have been found to cause cancer and many health related problems all that have been government approved are readily available are also part of the problem.

For instance plastics have been used for generations in everything from baby bottles to drinking water yet the studies show the harmful affects of using such products.

Phthalates found in common household products such as shower curtains, furniture, and other soft plastic materials are a serious health threat especially to the immunocompromised, elderly, children and pregnant women, can be found in almost all homes.

Phthalates are a known hormone disruptor and are responsible for lower sperm count, reproductive development in the unborn fetus.



Formaldehyde, found in the adhesives in particleboard, plywood, and medium-density fiberboard . Also in the finish of permanent-press fabrics. A known human carcinogen, formaldehyde is associated with nasal and brain cancers and possibly leukemia. Immediate reactions include eye irritation, skin and respiratory allergies, asthma, nausea, coughing, chest tightness, and wheezing.

Although there are agencies working towards exposing the factual based truths about the environment and its hazards towards the over all health and well being of our children, it is seems always a little too late for the children affected by the reports. One such agency is the ATSDR:


ATSDR has long advocated a comprehensive approach to promoting the environmental health of children. ATSDR has confirmed from more than 10 years of public health assessments, toxicological investigations, epidemiological studies, and reviews by expert work groups that children have unique characteristics that often place them at greater risk of adverse health effects when exposed to toxic substances emitted from hazardous waste sites or chemical releases. Children who live near hazardous waste sites may have greater exposures, greater potential for health problems, and less ability to avoid hazards than do adults. Exposure to hazardous substances can cause growth and development problems in children, such as learning disabilities, mental retardation, cerebral palsy, and hyperactive airways, as well as cancer.


www.atsdr.cdc.gov...

My Socratic question to you:

What part if any do you see the media as being responsible for the dumbing down of the American youth, and do you feel that video games and Asian based cartoons play a significant role in making children overly reliant upon outside stimulus for their imagination and critical thinking skills?



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by antar
 




Originally posted by antar

Your question actually poses a debate unto itself. However I will answer as best as possible in short.

Alright. That’s fine. Now that I think about it I believe the numbers of the jobs lost for outsourcing speak for themselves… it doesn’t reflect on the declining education in our country to me it suggests that they just care about cheap labor.

I believe that you raise some valid points about the no child left behind act and government agencies that have allowed for health hazards to be placed in foods. I believe that the problem lies within the school system.

After having been in schools so many times I know that I have succeeded when I have had good teachers. I have failed when my teachers stunk. I have also failed when the environment in the school was not fit for me.

I disagree with you on the notion that all of these harmful foods are to blame. Unhealthy foods are a problem. But I would disagree on to the extent that you believe they harm kids.

I will hope to prove to you that these processed foods are only part of a larger problem.

First, I think that a lot of the problem can be blamed on television. Let me give you an alarming statistic.

Also, it’s been known that the more you watch television, the more overweight you become. I found this website that basically explains the problems that watching too much television causes.

www.csun.edu...&health.html

It goes in detail to explain how much television children, and, adults watch. And, what kinds of things they watch on television. Television makes someone inactive. You never know to what extent they become inactive until you see statistics on it.

I believe that therefore the problem of the lack of intelligence, or, lack of drive cannot be placed on these governmental health agencies, but, clearly that much of it has to be placed on television. Do you understand what it is like to be a kid and to be inactive? When you’re a kid you don’t have much of anything to do and you don’t know much of anyone. So, what do you do? All you can do is watch television. People who watch television take up a large portion of their day watching television. Think about how much of that 1500 hours that the children spent watching television could be spent studying science. How can we train people to become the next Nikola Tesla if they’re brainwashed by these television media shows all the time?

Also, you need to do reading outside of school. Learning doesn’t take place only in school. It is of my view that people who don’t read outside of school are likely to only read the textbook and then they don’t want to read anymore outside of class. That promotes apathy.

Apathy is caused by lack of interest in school, and, if Johnny isn’t reading outside of school, then, Johnny isn’t interested in what he is learning. There is something called the Jigsaw approach to the classroom. It is theorized that many students are left out in classroom discussions. So, in order to bring the students that are left out, or made fun of, they are asked to collaborate with each other.



Eventually each student will come back to her or his jigsaw group and will try to present a well-organized report to the group. The situation is specifically structured so that the only access any member has to the other five assignments is by listening closely to the report of the person reciting. Thus, if Tyrone doesn't like Pedro, or if he thinks Sara is a nerd and tunes her out or makes fun of her, he cannot possibly do well on the test that follows.

www.jigsaw.org...
As a result, the students are taught how to show empathy for one another, and, they are forced to learn how to work as a group. I believe one of the reasons that many students fail in school is because they have low self-esteem. They don’t get to show what they know. Perhaps your son if he read and he was in a jigsaw classroom would appreciate it because he would be able to show what he knows to the rest of the class, the class would appreciate your son, and then, he would feel accepted in the class.

I also believe that much of the blame can be placed with the way socialization in schools is set up. This piece on socialization in high-schools exemplifies how I feel about public High-Schools and should really prove my point that the blame lies within the school and we need to change it.


What makes the question of status problematic is that everyone can't be at the top at the same time. The amount of available status is fixed, so if someone moves up, someone else must move down. Many former high school students can attest to the vagaries of this system. Common sense dictates that if numerous students are focused on their status, with many enduring endless putdowns, it will negatively affect their academic and social development.
It's difficult to imagine a more artificial environment for socialization than the public high school. Children are segregated by age and move from grade to grade within a narrow band of their immediate peers. This is a completely foreign environment to the one high school graduates will face. The high school experience does not easily translate to the real world. Home-school critics falsely believe that in order to be properly socialized, a child needs to spend long hours with children in his or her peer group.

www.crosswalk.com...
I believe that we could change the socialization in High-School and make it better to make a more positive environment for the students that are left out. I believe if more people felt like a part of school and had a good time collaborating with other students that school would be more enjoyable for more people.

Now for your Socratic question


My Socratic question to you:

What part if any do you see the media as being responsible for the dumbing down of the American youth, and do you feel that video games and Asian based cartoons play a significant role in making children overly reliant upon outside stimulus for their imagination and critical thinking skills?

I do not believe video games make people too reliant on images. I think playing too many video games makes one reliant on images. As for the Asian based cartoons making children overly reliant on other stimuli for imagination and thinking skills—I would blame cartoons here more, American cartoons for more of the problem. Cartoons these days are not insightful at all what so ever. The more and more people that begin to watch shows like Spongebob squarepants the more and more that I think there is something wrong with this country.

My Socratic question #4 to you is:
What do you believe we can do about how socialization is like in High-School? I believe we need to change the social hierarchy in High-School. I believe the current social hierarchy in High-School is too competitive and needs to change to allow more and more students who are left out to feel accepted. I think we need to begin a new age of tolerance. What are your views on this subject



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   

I will be arguing on the position that I do not believe that the government causes ignorance. First, let me define what I believe to be ignorant. Ignorance is ignoring the facts of a given situation. I will talk about different situations where people are ignorant and I hope to show why they are ignorant because of their social conditions and not because of something unseen.


And the proof I have given is being ignored by how many people including you? Furthermore I am still waiting to hear about the social implications that overrule my examples. How many people are ignorant because the facts about their overall well being are hidden and instead they choose to believe and accept blindly that when the government allows or endorses something it is then an accepted safety measure on their behalf? How many people have suffered extreme bodily trauma, brain dysfunction, mental disease and died through products that were deemed safe by our government?

And an important point for you to understand is that the government does indeed regulate all Television, and radio "programs". The main reason people who watch an abundance of TV get fat is because of all of the commercials directed towards fast food. When you are tired and staring wide eyed at the boob tube, you become easily suggestible. This is when they go in through media propaganda and dictate what you will buy, what you crave and what you desire. And it is regulated and sponsored by the government for the consumer.

Another point to be understood is in reference to the educational system and the point you made about "Throwing money" at the schools system not being of any help. When the funding is allocated only to the weakest links, to the poorest children with socioeconomic and learning challenges, we loose the ability to promote a sense of higher learning as it is not a monetary priority.

You also said that high schools lack good teachers and I have to strongly disagree with you on that one. It is not the teachers in most instances it is the curriculum which is government controlled which is directly responsible. Again I remind you that it is set up presently to reward those schools which comply with the policies of government rules set in place to give the funding to the challenged students and in so doing have left a huge rift in the ability to work with the median and brighter students.

If we do not begin to raise the overall curriculum and rise to the highest standards, then we will continue to fall into a chasm of lower educational deficiency. This will not lead our students into the future of the top paying jobs in a technologically advanced global society. Hence many of the best paying jobs will continue to be outsourced and the children will eventually be forced into lower socioeconomic jobs in the future.

I cannot stress enough the involvement of government in all of the pieces of this puzzle. Your signature leads me to think you would in all actuality agree.


As a result, the students are taught how to show empathy for one another, and, they are forced to learn how to work as a group. I believe one of the reasons that many students fail in school is because they have low self-esteem. They don’t get to show what they know. Perhaps your son if he read and he was in a jigsaw classroom would appreciate it because he would be able to show what he knows to the rest of the class, the class would appreciate your son, and then, he would feel accepted in the class.


First of all I have to say that I am sorry your educational experience was for the most part undesirable. My son is a STARS student and very popular for his wit and charm. He has been in the same school all of his life. I would NEVER expect the public schools system to teach him the valuable lessons learned at home such as empathy, consideration and respect for his fellow students and human beings in general.

His natural curiosity has lead him in the direction of self learned discoveries in subjects he would never even see until college level classes. Many children will fall through the cracks long before that if change does not happen and happen fast in our educational system.

Obama just said, No child left behind needs to be revamped, and that parent involvement is critical. That in order to compete with the jobs of the future children must strive for excellence. (Yes I have his Monday town hall speech on) And no I do not feel any fatter for it...

I do have a fight on 'my' hands on most weekends to keep all of my children from sitting in front of the TV and playing video games.

One of the greatest tidbits I can share with them other than to develop a strong spiritual base, is to never expect the school to teach you what you can learn on your own. To use the Internet to dive into subjects of interest, to learn all you can and then let the education be the credit for what you have already learned.

And TV can be a great family time as well as informative and interesting, we love to watch shows like How it is made, History channel events, animal planet and family oriented programs for the most part. Scary movies at Halloween are usually PG and Disney type movies like The Haunted Mansion. The kids rebel once in a while and think I am too strict about certain types of shows, but they also have learned discretion and are not desensitized by media.



They are healthy, happy well adjusted children and that was not because of allowing the schools to control either my parental role, nor my children's destiny.



I do not believe video games make people too reliant on images.


This again is a subject in our home of great debate. I urge my children to put down the video games and turn off the TV as the overload of visual images do in fact distract the young mind and create a rift between their natural ability to use their own imagination by reading or drawing which in turn opens both left and right hemispheres of the brain and does enhance critical thinking skills, math and musical abilities.

Do you see where this is leading? That when we expect outside stimulus to raise our children, to allow schools to be the base of their scholastic interests, or TV and video games to keep them always on the peripheral of their own intelligence, then throw in unconscious eating habits, environmental factors, media propaganda, societal stressors, socioeconomic factors, and it spins the young mind, molds the young potential into a non being, dumbed down to say the least.



My Socratic question #4 to you is:
What do you believe we can do about how socialization is like in High-School? I believe we need to change the social hierarchy in High-School. I believe the current social hierarchy in High-School is too competitive and needs to change to allow more and more students who are left out to feel accepted. I think we need to begin a new age of tolerance. What are your views on this subject


This is a subject dear to my heart. I have always spoken up for and befriended the under dog, the geek the underprivileged. Again this is something which begins in the home, and no matter which side your child falls on, whether the bully or the oppressed, the true lesson of character building must begin at home, and unless the child is at risk of personal danger, these things have a way of working out. I would rather teach my child how to handle either side than to make him one of the sheeple. So far there is nothing we as a family have not been able to learn and grow from, which has made us stronger individuals, and eventually the bullies quit if they do not get the reaction they expect.

My Socratic question to you:

Would more or less government involvement be needed to help wake people up to the reality of the world we live in, or would more involvement simply create an Orwellian future?



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
I want to thank Memoryshock for letting me and Antar have this debate. We've had some disagreements as to what causes what, and, we have some differences on where we stand on this issue. But I do think that we both agree that people aren't learning, and, they're being kept ignorant. With how they're being kept ignorant we disagree on-- and-- we disagree as to what makes people stupid, and, we disagree as to how we can change this. But this is a very important issue and all of the facts need not be ignored. Antar believes much of the problem is caused by these foods that are unhealthy. I believe that much of the problem can be placed on excessive amounts of television watching, which, can lead to unhealthy habits of eating food, and, that is part of a larger problem and we could do a separate debate on that in it of itself.

But I ask, what will we be able to do about this? I think the topic of education and why people are ignorant is a very important one. I do not think that the government wishes for people to be dumbed down. I think they may manipulate people but I don't believe anyone wishes for anyone to be dumb.

As we end this debate, I think that we should both acknowledge the seriousness of the issue, and, we need to get a course of action in place to get more people willing to learn. That is what I believe the problem lies.

The government can take part of the blame, yes. I believe that we are at the point where (in response to Antar's question) that if we let the government intervene less in education and allowed for teachers to establish their own sort of curriculum in some kind of union, then, I think they would be allowed more freedom and would allow for the student to learn more interesting material.

My public school experience hasn't been that great in High-School, and, I can attest that the government does need to be less involved in education (like with their propaganda in health class), but, from my experience I believe that schools need to train their teachers and teach them ways to encourage students.

What we need not to do is to worry about waking people up-- but my opinion-- to change the educational structure from within and the way people learn.

I again want to thank Memoryshock for letting me have this debate, on this very important issue, and, I thank Antar for agreeing to participate.



posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Final statements:

The truest measure of a child's beginning starts in the formative years, and we can all learn from taking a good look at our children, all children and knowing that they are the future, The New Man destined to become anything that they choose to be if given the right opportunity.

That opportunity is our greatest challenge, to allow a child to grow first from within and to nurture his inner strengths. Then he will stand a chance against the brain washing and prejudice, indoctrinations that will surely follow him into adulthood.

This can only be done when we realize that every child no matter how challenged or brilliant, are deserving to be protected from harm, from hatred of the past, repressions of generations and for their physical, biological and mental health.

Up until now society as a whole has failed the children of our planet, have given them educations which have been nothing more than dead knowledge, a continuation of the past, and forcing them to accept the miserable past as a future of promise. Children are wise and they know when they are being corrupted, manipulated and directed against their better nature.

They learn from their parents and teachers who in turn learned from theirs, and what they have acquired has been poison of the spirit and that leads a person to the death of the soul. And once your soul is damaged, who worries about what the politicians are doing or if the air you breathe is healthy or not or if the the food is fit for human consumption? They learned long before to never question authority, to accept blindly those that they at one time instinctually knew were on the wrong track, a lifeless path. A continuation of cradle to grave mentality, mediocrity.

Everyone wants to be loved, appreciated, accepted. And when an individual is born and we are born individuals, it makes the conformists uncomfortable, uneasy, so they medicate and rather than admit their own flaws, insinuate it is the child, that it has to be the child. And to make everyone comfortable they continue until the child is no longer an individual, unpredictable. Until he no longer feels the joy of a natural high or the nature of down time and its lows. This can be done through over the counter drugs or oververt actions and neglect.

The actual dumbing down of our future generations is as difficult as squashing a rose petal between your fingers. A delicate rose. And the public schools systems know this, their funding is directed in this manner.

Society and the government backing it, wants everyone to grow up to be predictable, easy to manipulate, control. They want automatons, people who are just in the middle, mediocre.

In the future there will be no question as to whether or not industry will be allowed to pollute the air and the ground and the water, there will be no need for the big pharmaceutical companies to play the leading role in peoples lives.

I have to be honest, I have never quite felt comfortable with the words 'dumbing down' or stupid or even ignorant, people that are unaware is more like it for me, because everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. And for so many people it started generations ago, with the blind leading the blind. It is also because of the hidden toxins in their lives, the food that they eat and the drugs that they are prescribed.

In closing I will say that through government standards, laws and regulation that if any one entity is to blame it is them. Honest people trust and the government knows that and takes full advantage as frankenidealist35 has stated.

This was a pleasure Frankenidealist35, Memoryshock and the fightclub pub who I have enjoyed laughing with through this whole debate.

Antar



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 10:18 PM
link   
The judgement is in and Antar takes this by majority decision. Congratulations to both Fighters for an entertaining debate!



Challenge Match: Frankidealist35 vs antar: Government Sponsored Ignorance?

When I first started reading this debate, I was struck by Frankidealst35’s opening as being “All over the place” so to speak.
In his “First Reply”, I was confused by his references to “Processed Food” and never fully recovered from that.

Antar’s opening was nicely laid out and gave the reader a good indication of where the debate was headed.

All through the debate, Frankidealist35 tended to agree with his opponent far too much. This is a debate and it was his position to “disagree”… In fact it was the purpose of the debate.

Frankidealist35 rallied somewhat later on in his assertions involving young people and reading. Yet he never pressed that to full advantage.

Now that being said, Frankidealist35 used the “Corporate argument” nicely, but again, did not press home the advantage.

I have not neglected antar in this judgment, it was just clear from the onset that antar was more focused and presented a better over all case.

While I personally believe in the side that Frankidealist35 took in this debate, I feel that he did not present a compelling argument when compared to antar’s direct and well formed presentation.

With that, I give the debate to antar.




Frankidealist35 vs antar: Government Sponsored Ignorance?

Both fighters made a reasonable start, but with neither really laying out the terms of the debate, this continued throughout the debate, with neither fighter really managing to get on top.

Both fighters used good rhetorical argument, and provided examples to back up their case..

Frankidealist35 seemed to rely on laying out the case for the pro position, ad then simply reacted to the con positions argument, rather than seizing the opportunity to further strngthen the position.

Some good work was undermined by this technique as we saw proactive rather than reactive arguments.

Antar made a good job of laying out the con position gradually, and not becoming embroiled in a piece by piece dissection attempt of opponents position, instead simply sticking to the position, and then tying the pieces together.

Antar had opponent reaching and made good points which opponent had to concede, through good use of logical argument and rhetoric.

Although neither fighter fully convinced, the judgement goes to Antar.





new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join