UPSB v4

Serious Discussion / UPSB PF Debate #1 --- Signups

  1. strat1227
    Date: Wed, Apr 18 2012 04:47:35

    Need at least 2 people. Topic to be decided. You each get a 700 word opening statement (containing as many distinct arguments as you wish), a 700 word rebuttal of the other's arguments (while introducing no new arguments of your own), and then a 300 word closing statement.

  2. SJ
    Date: Wed, Apr 18 2012 08:56:51

    may i ask what PF is

  3. Loanshark
    Date: Wed, Apr 18 2012 18:52:38

    why

  4. strat1227
    Date: Wed, Apr 18 2012 19:08:37

    SJ wrote: may i ask what PF is
    Public Forum Debate, it's just a style as opposed to Lincoln-Douglass, Policy, etc

  5. Vassenato
    Date: Wed, Apr 18 2012 19:37:38

    who the hell is going to read all that on upsb.

  6. SJ
    Date: Wed, Apr 18 2012 22:14:37

    Vassenato wrote: who the hell is going to read all that on upsb.
    u dont even

  7. Zombo
    Date: Wed, Apr 18 2012 22:30:26

    whats the subject...

  8. funnky
    Date: Wed, Apr 18 2012 22:41:09

    this is pointless thread to me.....

  9. IAmTheMrGuy
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 18:45:26

    What are we debating on?

  10. tibi
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 18:54:08

    Chances and risks that come along with social networks?

  11. strat1227
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 19:05:55

    Haha they were already debating a topic in the shoutbox, somoene just told me to make a thread for it so I did, doesn't look like they're still interested though. So now this is a sign-up thread, who's interested? Need at least 2 people

  12. IAmTheMrGuy
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 19:14:04

    What's the type of commitment required? I'd probably be in, though, so sign me up haha

  13. strat1227
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 19:15:29

    Lol only commitment is the 3 posts I described in my original post

  14. ChainBreak
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 19:28:33

    I could participate. Don't expect too much from me though. I got exams coming up.

  15. tibi
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 19:37:54

    Sounds fun, got to take exams soon too but I would like to participate as well

  16. Cubesnail
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 20:56:09

    Could I volunteer as co-judge? :D

  17. Whoadie
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 21:24:19

    I do policy and congress, I could easily do a pf round

  18. Awesome
    Date: Thu, Apr 19 2012 21:50:53

    I am in, sounds fun.

  19. Eternity
    Date: Thu, Apr 26 2012 08:29:27

    I debate in more of Asian Parliamentary style, but sounds fun. Count me in if it's still open!

  20. Chobi
    Date: Thu, Apr 26 2012 16:08:18

    i am in, curious to see how this'll go within the forum with my experience in worlds (british parli) last year (in which i failed horribly)

  21. Zkhan
    Date: Thu, Apr 26 2012 16:43:23

    PS debates would be more intriguing. I think other debates should be in Serious Discussion.

  22. King
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 02:04:54

    /in

  23. Zombo
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 02:54:34

    i suggest vocal debates + public script, you should practice your voice too

  24. strat1227
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 02:56:28

    Zombo wrote: i suggest vocal debates + public script, you should practice your voice too
    Hmm, maybe for the next one

  25. TheAafg
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 03:09:04

    /inn >inb4 religion vs atheism.

  26. strat1227
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 03:14:56

    TheAafg wrote: /inn >inb4 religion vs atheism.
    meh, controversial topics are boring to me, practical ones are much more interesting imo

  27. strat1227
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 03:15:27

    also, if you want you can put what kinda stuff you're interested in. I might to a philosophy type debate

  28. funnky
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 03:15:32

    TheAafg wrote: /inn >inb4 religion vs atheism.
    id actually like to hear this one.

  29. Whoadie
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 03:48:26

    funnky wrote: id actually like to hear this one.
    Its also a little too one sided

  30. strat1227
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 03:51:15

    Whoadie wrote: Its also a little too one sided
    Well the resolution can help skew it towards one side or the other ... like "should religion be outlawed" would probably be mostly pro-religion, because something like that would restrict individuals' rights whereas something like "is religion harmful to society" would probably be much harder to argue pro-religion, because there's such a long list of religious persecution all depends on the format of the topic

  31. funnky
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 03:58:52

    strat1227 wrote: Well the resolution can help skew it towards one side or the other ... like "should religion be outlawed" would probably be mostly pro-religion, because something like that would restrict individuals' rights whereas something like "is religion harmful to society" would probably be much harder to argue pro-religion, because there's such a long list of religious persecution all depends on the format of the topic
    true. but id like to hear a debate about whether atheism should or shouldn't be looked down upon from religious stand point. or something along those lines

  32. Loanshark
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 03:59:04

    strat1227 wrote: also, if you want you can put what kinda stuff you're interested in. I might to a philosophy type debate
    How about something like is morality absolute or relative? Or does absolute truth exist? Just some suggestions

  33. strat1227
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 04:02:33

    Loanshark wrote: How about something like is morality absolute or relative?
    yeah generally the type of philosophy debate that works best is deontology vs consequencialism; ie "if a train was about to hit 10 people and you could pull a lever that changed its track that would make it hit 3 people instead, should you do it" or "if we had the opportunity, should we have shot down the 9/11 planes" etc

  34. Chobi
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 04:12:14

    Zombo;195057]i suggest vocal debates + public script, you should practice your voice too[/QUOTE] +9000, I would enjoy this. [QUOTE=strat1227 wrote: also, if you want you can put what kinda stuff you're interested in. I might to a philosophy type debate
    I would also like this.

  35. MickChickenn
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 04:19:39

    This is a great idea.

  36. Zombo
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 12:04:33

    topic suggestion under normal circumstances, is it morally wrong to use the elevator to go only one floor up? Unusual topics will reward creativity

  37. strat1227
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 18:21:19

    Zombo wrote: topic suggestion under normal circumstances, is it morally wrong to use the elevator to go only one floor up? Unusual topics will reward creativity
    lol that topic is insanely skewed towards the neg though. creative topics are fun but they have to be balanced I can't think of any classical moral systems that would make that morally wrong

  38. Zombo
    Date: Fri, Apr 27 2012 22:21:10

    strat1227 wrote: lol that topic is insanely skewed towards the neg though. creative topics are fun but they have to be balanced I can't think of any classical moral systems that would make that morally wrong
    uhh yes?
    Spoilerstarts with u

  39. strat1227
    Date: Sat, Apr 28 2012 02:24:47

    utilitarianism could be argued both ways ... wasted effort you don't have any moral obligation to use a screwdriver if there's a powerdrill next to you ... same applies to stairs vs elevator

  40. Zombo
    Date: Sat, Apr 28 2012 05:41:59

    strat1227 wrote: utilitarianism could be argued both ways ... wasted effort you don't have any moral obligation to use a screwdriver if there's a powerdrill next to you ... same applies to stairs vs elevator
    extreme example: a group of 15 people enter the elevator at the ground floor. they're going up to the 9th floor. you arrive as the door is closing, forcing them to be re-open. you select 2nd floor. stairs is right beside the elevator EVEN WORSE CASE: you were at the 2nd floor, forcing the elevator to stop on the 2nd floor. then you press the 4th floor by mistake and press 3rd. Is this morally right, considering you've in an elevator with 15 other people?

  41. strat1227
    Date: Sat, Apr 28 2012 05:59:37

    Zombo wrote: extreme example: a group of 15 people enter the elevator at the ground floor. they're going up to the 9th floor. you arrive as the door is closing, forcing them to be re-open. you select 2nd floor. stairs is right beside the elevator EVEN WORSE CASE: you were at the 2nd floor, forcing the elevator to stop on the 2nd floor. then you press the 4th floor by mistake and press 3rd. Is this morally right, considering you've in an elevator with 15 other people?
    Lol you very clearly said in your original post that it was "under normal circumstances" not "extreme" or "even worse" cases you can think of cases where utilitarianism would lead you do deem ANY action morally wrong or right if you make up some scenario where the alternative is worse ... but utilitarianism doesn't require that you be omniscient lol you can't be omniscient so you're not held responsible for consequences of your actions that you couldn't have known about

  42. Zombo
    Date: Sat, Apr 28 2012 14:13:17

    why are we discussing here, we're spoiling the debate... under normal circumstances mean -> person is able-bodied and is not carrying a large amount of load that would require the elevator and in this case, you are omniscient: you see the elevator closing, so you know theres ppl in there and you know you only want to go to 2nd, you should just let it go and hit the stairs

  43. strat1227
    Date: Sat, Apr 28 2012 17:10:46

    lol if you're asking "Is there a single case that taking the elevator is immoral" then the answer is always yes, for anything ... there's no point in debating that, if you use utilitarianism then there's NO action you can't justify in SOME situation ... it's a dumb argument lol, there are much better ones feel free to make it yourself if you want, but i wouldn't ever want to officiate/judge a round like that

  44. Awesome
    Date: Sat, Apr 28 2012 18:42:58

    I had no idea taking an elevator could be a moral problem, its more of a "is it polite to..." kinda deal.

  45. strat1227
    Date: Sat, Apr 28 2012 22:04:34

    Well it's taking utilitarianism to levels it was never meant to go to haha, but it can be argued

  46. Zombo
    Date: Mon, Jun 25 2012 09:16:41

    topic i'm interested in seeing debated: "9/11 would have been avoided if flight attendants was not a female-dominated profession"

  47. strat1227
    Date: Mon, Jun 25 2012 15:19:44

    lol interesting. airline pilot is a male-dominated profession though, and there were plenty of men on board, it'd be hard as fuck to win as pro i'd think i'm down to moderate another debate if it's between two people i know will actually do it, last time neither debate got past the first speeches. maybe we can do a live one and broadcast it on the radio

  48. Cubesnail
    Date: Tue, Oct 16 2012 22:37:48

    How about something like "Social media is ruining the English language"

  49. shoeman6
    Date: Fri, Oct 19 2012 17:43:05

    Why not make it socratic? It might be less intimidating that way.

  50. FingerNotPen
    Date: Sat, Nov 24 2012 14:57:14

    i volunteer as tribute lol? :D

  51. strat1227
    Date: Sat, Nov 24 2012 15:08:18

    I'd be willing to host one live on the radio if anyone is interested in doing that @Loanshark etc

  52. shoeman6
    Date: Sat, Nov 24 2012 18:33:32

    Sure.