----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 4:36 PM Subject: Re: Arguing the other side: The Case for the Palestinians by Devil's Advocate
Dan wrote: >> As far as leaving stuff out, I don't think a debator is required to list all >> of the potential flaws in his position.>> > > Actually, I rather think one is. Well, maybe not all of them, but at least to > acknowledge evidence that does not support his position. Hmm, when I judged debate, I was specifically required to not judge the debators against what I knew. For example, if I knew of data that falsified one of the affirmatives key points, and the negative did not bring it up, then the affirmative won that point. After you brought the data up, if I were to continue the debate, I certainly would need to acknowledge the data or let you score points. Now, a good debator would know the counter arguements and the data that support them and be ready to discuss them in detail. But, I don't think most debators bring up the minuses for their position. Dan M. > <<Finally, your response certainly looked like a reasoned arguement on the > merits of the case to me. IMVBO, our exchange shows how there can be a > discussion based on the merits.>> > > I concede that a case can be made for the Palestinians. Alas that almost no > Palestinians make this case or concede that a case can equally be made for > Israel. > > > Tom Beck > > > > > "I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I didn't realize I'd also > see the last." - Jerry Pournelle >
