"Mary's First Speech" (1928) by Winston Churchill
In the account of the debate Grant discusses in chapter five, he suggest how the debater who has more data, better evidence and more evocative imagery, often does NOT win if her opponent is more skilled at "the art of debate" (102).
If this is often true in the world:
A) Do you think that is a cause for concern? Would we be better off if debates were most consistently won by the debater with more data and better evidence?
B) Should school focus more on helping students find the best evidence to support a case or in learning the "art of debate"?
Yes I do believe that it is a cause of concern that a debater with strong data will consistently lose to the debater who has mastered "The Art of Debate". I believe we would be better off if the strong evidence won more consistently but I accept the fact that it should not always win. We all agree that debates are subjective and can be hard to decide a winner based on the morality of the topic. Say for example a debater is arguing for segregation, regardless of how strong their evidence is, it should never win no matter if their opponent was more skilled at "The Art". Schools should focus more on finding the best evidence but it should not throw out "The Art". Helping students find the best evidence is great but if they cannot put the evidence together cohesively into an argument then it will be a waste of time since it is the evidence that backs up "The Art" It is necessary to combine the two in order to create a great debater. The debater who can balance "The Art" and present a strong argument with just the right amount of strong evidence will win every time over a weak argument with the same amount of strong evidence. Evidence means nothing if a debater does not understand at least something about the art of debating.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I do find it interesting that people tend to side with “The Art” over siding with strong evidence. While I understand that evidence needs to be presented in a confident and convincing way, it almost makes me wonder if we tend to be more interested in watching a good “show” over strong evidence.
DeleteIt is true that debates are often won by the better debater rather than the debater with more evidence. However, I believe we would be better off if debates were won the debater with more evidence. I also believe that schools should focus on evidence and truth rather than the art of debating. Otherwise, everyone would take whatever side sounded better to them. I often see this in politics. Very few politicians, Republican or Democrat choose to go along with the facts. Instead, they say whatever they feel like people in their party will appreciate.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everything that you wrote. I feel that too often evidence is ignored in debates because it is not always comforting to hear. Politicians are experts at making their side feel the most comfortable so that more people will be persuaded to agree with them. When evidence is weaponized against the rival party, the truth can be very confusing. If schools taught to look for evidence rather than to follow the best-spoken person, we would probably see less turmoil within our society today.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt is concerning to me that data and better evidence don’t usually win against the art of debate. I wish that there should be an equal balance of data and the debate artform. I thought it rather interesting that Grant mentioned that Harish’s Achilles’ heel was that “ … his brilliant arguments aren’t always grounded in facts” (p. 99). This was Grant’s example of an excellent debater. Even though Harish didn’t have the data memorized, he involved the audience in questioning their initial view of preschool subsidies. If individuals were both well-read and well-versed in the art of debate, there would be the opportunity to decide based on both important aspects of a decision. Art of the debate seems like it is sometimes a presentation with flair, and sometimes flair isn’t accompanied by fact. An example of this is social media, and some news outlets these days. Flair in presenting in these types of settings can lead people to be persuaded without fact.
ReplyDeleteAs stated previously, both evidence to support the case and learning the art of debate would be the best way for schools to instruct students interested in this area. I feel that the art of the debate could be summed up as the ability to communicate effectively, and as encouraging the audience to consider both sides of the debate. Students need to learn to be better communicators but need to stick to the facts when debating a point.
Jillian B
It is my understanding that to win a debate, you have to convince the most people that you are correct. With that mindset, it makes sense that the person who will win is the one that is the best at the “art of debate”. Because of this, I don’t think that it is a matter of concern. As I say in most things, I don’t think it is a matter of “this” or “that”, but a matter of “both”. I think that schools should focus on both finding and effectively using good data, and learning the art of debate.
ReplyDelete-Michael Draper
Debating is a skill that people can get good at like any other skill. It's like asking the question if the person that puts in more hours is more deserving of the trophy than the one with more talent. Debates are a tad bit more influential on large crowds of people, so the winner is more important in this case. Nonetheless, I don't think it's a concern.
ReplyDeleteSchools typically have a speech and debate class, but since they're mainly focused on competition, it makes that the "Art of Debate" should be taught with more precedence. Especially since the whole point of a debate is to win.
- Elias
Delete