Need help with a debate for school

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Vegitto

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Vegitto

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Vegitto

-Slippery slope:
I don't quite get this one..

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/slipslop.html

Basically claim that if this is allowed there will be no limits on the punishments and it will degenerate civilization, etc etc...

Used skillfully, this is particularly effective.

Good luck!

Hmm.. I'm not sure how to use this.. How should I use this in regard to say.. Speeding or driving drunk?

Give extreme examples of punishments that could be given out for crimes that would be objectionable to most people. Horrifically embarassing and potentially mentally damaging punishments. Whatever you can think of to make people think that supporting alternative punishments will eventually cause them to descend to that level.

It is intellectually dishonest but it often works.

So basically give extreme negative examples of alternative punishment? Like what?

Use your imagination, but don't get too outlandish as that will expose the house of sand your position is built on.

 

[Vegitto]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Vegitto

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Vegitto

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Vegitto

-Slippery slope:
I don't quite get this one..

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/slipslop.html

Basically claim that if this is allowed there will be no limits on the punishments and it will degenerate civilization, etc etc...

Used skillfully, this is particularly effective.

Good luck!

Hmm.. I'm not sure how to use this.. How should I use this in regard to say.. Speeding or driving drunk?

Give extreme examples of punishments that could be given out for crimes that would be objectionable to most people. Horrifically embarassing and potentially mentally damaging punishments. Whatever you can think of to make people think that supporting alternative punishments will eventually cause them to descend to that level.

It is intellectually dishonest but it often works.

So basically give extreme negative examples of alternative punishment? Like what?

Use your imagination, but don't get too outlandish as that will expose the house of sand your position is built on.

Heh.. Okay . Well, I'm gonna eat dinner now.. After that, I'll try and use that argument, and see how it works .

Thanks a lot.

 

[clamum]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
Some top tips for you:

1. Turn someone?s generality into an absolute. For example, if someone makes a general statement that Americans celebrate Christmas, point out that some people are Jewish and so anyone who thinks that ALL Americans celebrate Christmas is stupid. (Bonus points for accusing the person of being anti-Semitic.)
2. Turn someone?s factual statements into implied preferences. For example, if someone mentions that not all Catholic priests are pedophiles, accuse the person who said it of siding with pedophiles.
3. Turn factual statements into implied equivalents. For example, if someone says that Ghandi didn?t eat cows, accuse the person of stupidly implying that cows deserve equal billing with Gandhi.
4. Omit key words. For example, if someone says that people can?t eat rocks, accuse the person of being stupid for suggesting that people can?t eat. Bonus points for arguing that some people CAN eat pebbles if they try hard enough.
5. Assume the dumbest interpretation. For example, if someone says that he can run a mile in 12 minutes, assume he means it happens underwater and argue that no one can hold his breath that long.
6. Hallucinate entirely different points. For example, if someone says apples grow on trees, accuse him of saying snakes have arms and then point out how stupid that is.
7. Use the intellectual laziness card. For example, if someone says that ice is cold, recommend that he take graduate courses in chemistry and meteorology before jumping to stupid conclusions that display a complete ignorance of the complexity of ice.

:laugh:

Number 2 happens around here quite a bit it seems.

 

[Vegitto]

Anyone else have any solid arguments? I can't really use the slippery slope argument, it seems, I'd get butchered by my opponents. They're smart enough to see through it.

 

[Vegitto]

Originally posted by: Vegitto
Anyone else have any solid arguments? I can't really use the slippery slope argument, it seems, I'd get butchered by my opponents. They're smart enough to see through it.

 

[OSX]

Threaten to make your partner wear around a sign stating 'I AM A LAZY WASTE OF LIFE.'

Oh wait.....

 

[herkulease]

where do you go that you would be held back?

And rent books? I've never heard of this concept. I had to buy all my textbooks. except when i was in high school, where I got them on loan.

 

[Vegitto]

Originally posted by: herkulease
where do you go that you would be held back?

And rent books? I've never heard of this concept. I had to buy all my textbooks. except when i was in high school, where I got them on loan.

I'm still in high school. It works like this around here: You pay a company a fee plus a sum, and they deliver books your school's ordered from you. If you return the books in a timely fashion (ie, when the school year's over) you get the sum back.

Renting books is expensive (basically a whole paycheck) and we can't really afford that. I'm close to being held back due to getting a 1 (European equivalent of an F-) on a social studies assignment because my teacher was an asshole. You had to do something about colleges and the assignment would be completed with an acceptance form from a university or college. I can't afford going to college/uni (it works differently around here, you can't get a loan and the government doesn't give a ****** about you), so I never applied. If you apply and get accepted, you legally owe them money for a year (another dumb rule).

Anyways, if I flunk this I'm held back, if I'm held back I'll drop out of school and if I drop out of school.. Well.. I don't know that yet, and I hope I don't find out .

 

[moomoo40moo]

only thing i can think of which was mentioned before was that if criminals know that their sentence would be mandatory jail time, over something like talking to kids/community service, they would think twice before doing it. By having these criminals think twice before committing a crime, it is a natural deterrent prevents crime from even happening. somewhat offtopic, I remember hearing about some countries using the three strikes rule (not sure if still used or what) and for certain crimes, the criminal would lose a finger the first time, a hand for the 2nd crime, and their head for the third crime. Yeah, it's harsh but would it deter crime? If I lost my finger, I know that would sure as hell be more of a deterrent than talking to some kids.

 

[Vegitto]

Anyone.. Please? The debate is in a couple of hours (although it may be postponed until next week, but I'm not counting on that)..

 

[Tuktuk]

Very quick rundown of how to argue.. think of argument as an appeal to a spectrum of the audience's mind. For simplicity, lets divide up that spectrum into:

Logic/Reason
Emotion/Empathy
Moral Values

Let's see some logical reasons why alternative punishment is bad. For government policy, this often leads to cost. How much more does it cost to give a criminal alternative punishment rather than just send him to prison?

Emotion/Empathy. The drunk driver could be a good card to play here. This is where you bring up a specific example of some bastard who did something horrible and then basically got off scot free because of alternative punishment. A murderer who now gets to "teach kids about going the right path," or a drunk driver who killed a family and only had to pick up trash for a few weeks.

Moral values. This is where you BS the most. Don't rely to much on it much sprinkle it in here or there.

Its up to you for the research. Find arguments supporting yours and see how they approached it, what sources they used, etc. Appeal to each part of the spectrum, some more than others as you see fit. Most importantly find every possible counterargument and refute it, if the debate is short then cut it down to the most important parts.