View Poll Results: Do sources truly matter when forum debating?

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    41 80.39%
  • No

    10 19.61%
Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 130

Thread: Does posting sources while debating matter?

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    When I was a member of the debate team for two years in college, we were taught that following up your positions with verifiable sources was the rule and law in debate. This is especially important in any allegation of fact or usage of the historical record.

    It amazes me that we have a site here called DEBATE POLITICS and many feel that their own pompous pontifications are all that is needed in debate. For those, we should have a section called WHAT I BELIEVE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT since that is the depth and breadth of most of their posts.
    Though, if I were to return to an older stance of mine, I would tell you that all beliefs are mere beliefs and that cites are not absolute. They don't give you absolute certainty and correctness. I could argue alcohol is a poison upon society and cite the yearly death toll, yet that doesn't make me absolutely and undeniably correct that alcohol is a poison upon society. This absolute stance I take is especially correct for philosophical issues and matters of good and evil. Can abortion or homosexuality be proven good or evil? One can say it is good because it is harmless, yet how does harmlessness equal good/righteousness?

    You believe what you believe and you find certain fragments to support your belief.

  2. #72
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    Though, if I were to return to an older stance of mine, I would tell you that all beliefs are mere beliefs and that cites are not absolute. They don't give you absolute certainty and correctness. I could argue alcohol is a poison upon society and cite the yearly death toll, yet that doesn't make me absolutely and undeniably correct that alcohol is a poison upon society. This absolute stance I take is especially correct for philosophical issues and matters of good and evil. Can abortion or homosexuality be proven good or evil? One can say it is good because it is harmless, yet how does harmlessness equal good/righteousness?

    You believe what you believe and you find certain fragments to support your belief.
    People have reasons for what they believe and if you aren't prepared to provide those reasons, then you admit to having baseless ideas about reality.

  3. #73
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    You'll eventually learn that a person not responding means squat.
    Or it means the person not responding could have the other on ignore.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  4. #74
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:53 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,694

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    Though, if I were to return to an older stance of mine, I would tell you that all beliefs are mere beliefs and that cites are not absolute. They don't give you absolute certainty and correctness. I could argue alcohol is a poison upon society and cite the yearly death toll, yet that doesn't make me absolutely and undeniably correct that alcohol is a poison upon society. This absolute stance I take is especially correct for philosophical issues and matters of good and evil. Can abortion or homosexuality be proven good or evil? One can say it is good because it is harmless, yet how does harmlessness equal good/righteousness?

    You believe what you believe and you find certain fragments to support your belief.
    an example:

    If someone constantly rants and whines about the 47% who do not pay federal income tax and blame them on the Democratic party, that indeed can be proven by examining the historical record of the two Bush tax cuts which created the situation. Providing the votes and which party voted for those bills which created the situation can be established.

    The historical record is there. Use it.

    I have little use for pompous pontifications of personal belief supported only by the belief system itself.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  5. #75
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    When I was a member of the debate team for two years in college, we were taught that following up your positions with verifiable sources was the rule and law in debate. This is especially important in any allegation of fact or usage of the historical record.

    It amazes me that we have a site here called DEBATE POLITICS and many feel that their own pompous pontifications are all that is needed in debate. For those, we should have a section called WHAT I BELIEVE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT since that is the depth and breadth of most of their posts.
    It is importsnt for allegations of fact or usage of historical record. However, a lot of debate is also about reasoning through something. I would never argue there is no place for valid, reputable, and sound sourcing. But, it cannot replace thought, reasoning, and having your own take on an issue.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #76
    Sage
    mpg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Milford, CT
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,769

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Sometimes people post a link to support their claims, and the link contains data which refutes their claims. People need to read their own links. This example isn't a link, just a graph.

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/genera...post1059656108
    If you expect people to be rational, you aren't being rational.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    I'm getting ready to post my first true argument tomorrow. It has about 20 solid cites. I'm worried, though, because even though I anchored my argument with cites to make it credible, members might ask me to cite every single... sentence. That's impractical.

    What should I do? I know those who are ridiculous in their pedantry; because I haven't cited every sentence, I'm worried they'll simply dismiss every point I make.

  8. #78
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    I'm getting ready to post my first true argument tomorrow. It has about 20 solid cites. I'm worried, though, because even though I anchored my argument with cites to make it credible, members might ask me to cite every single... sentence. That's impractical.

    What should I do? I know those who are ridiculous in their pedantry; because I haven't cited every sentence, I'm worried they'll simply dismiss every point I make.
    Where are you doing this? Give me some context.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #79
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    I'm getting ready to post my first true argument tomorrow. It has about 20 solid cites. I'm worried, though, because even though I anchored my argument with cites to make it credible, members might ask me to cite every single... sentence. That's impractical.

    What should I do? I know those who are ridiculous in their pedantry; because I haven't cited every sentence, I'm worried they'll simply dismiss every point I make.
    Let me see if I can help and get this point through properly:

    Sit down and write a zero draft of your paper, a very quick first draft that, in general, lays out the basic lines of development for your paper. At this point, you’ll just be using your own words; you can come back later to integrate your sources more fully. No doubt, this zero draft will be very rough and incomplete, but it is valuable because it helps ensure that it will be your voice, and not that of your sources, that will take the lead in organizing your essay. Your zero draft will also help you begin to see how your research material can be used in the context of your basic discussion or argument—where it can fit in the context of your paper. (I add these notes - Notice how you want your voice, your reasoning to be front and center)

    http://library.rpcc.edu/docs/Integra...perhandout.pdf

    You should keep direct quotes to an absolute minimum in any research paper. A research paper is not a string of quotes linked together with brief text by you. If we want to read a bunch of quotes, we'd skip your paper and go to your bibliography to read the material for ourselves. (remember this is your argument and not your sources argument. If all you're doing is saying they said so, we should read them and not you.)
    The Research Paper

    I would never say don't use sources, as they are often necessary (though some arguements can be made without them). And when there is a factual issue, a source is needed. And sometimes it is good to have someone knowledgable on the issue agree with you. But those sources are less valuable once you understand you can find someone knowledgable to say the exact opposite and any other thing.

    But at the end of the day, you will need to have sound reasoning that is yours. You need to reason well and create a sound logical foundation on which to place your support.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Attn1 Re: Does posting sources while debating matter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Let me see if I can help and get this point through properly:

    Sit down and write a zero draft of your paper, a very quick first draft that, in general, lays out the basic lines of development for your paper. At this point, you’ll just be using your own words; you can come back later to integrate your sources more fully. No doubt, this zero draft will be very rough and incomplete, but it is valuable because it helps ensure that it will be your voice, and not that of your sources, that will take the lead in organizing your essay. Your zero draft will also help you begin to see how your research material can be used in the context of your basic discussion or argument—where it can fit in the context of your paper. (I add these notes - Notice how you want your voice, your reasoning to be front and center)

    http://library.rpcc.edu/docs/Integra...perhandout.pdf

    You should keep direct quotes to an absolute minimum in any research paper. A research paper is not a string of quotes linked together with brief text by you. If we want to read a bunch of quotes, we'd skip your paper and go to your bibliography to read the material for ourselves. (remember this is your argument and not your sources argument. If all you're doing is saying they said so, we should read them and not you.)
    The Research Paper

    I would never say don't use sources, as they are often necessary (though some arguements can be made without them). And when there is a factual issue, a source is needed. And sometimes it is good to have someone knowledgable on the issue agree with you. But those sources are less valuable once you understand you can find someone knowledgable to say the exact opposite and any other thing.

    But at the end of the day, you will need to have sound reasoning that is yours. You need to reason well and create a sound logical foundation on which to place your support.
    That is true; I've used my own words yet found a few gems of info in certain books---I use their cites.

    I have a bit of my own opinion, but then I cite facts. This argument is about guns. I cannot copy/post on this phone, but I have a rough example of a segment and the cite:

    (((In 1996, Australian lawmakers passed sweeping legislation banning guns. Their intent was to make Australia a safer country. What they did was make it a soft target for criminals. Within just a few years of the gun ban, homicides were up 3.2% in Australia. Assaults were up 8.6%. Armed robberies climbed nearly 45%! In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides climbed 300%! (18) Does this sound safe to you?)))

    (18) (Cite) ---> (In italics) The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland; Jon Dougherty, "Britain, Australia top U.S. in violent crime," WorldNetDaily.com, March 5, 2001.

    I did a ton of argumentative research papers and arguments in college, and they only required 15 proper MLA cites per paper. What really worries me is that despite good structure and anchoring, my argument will be nit-picked apart. If I inadvertently not cite a little blip of data, though I've cited 20+ actual hard-searched sources, then I'd feel that I'm being trolled. College standards are greater than internet forum standards; I don't want to have to cite every blip of data, or worse, general knowledge.
    Last edited by Wake; 07-28-11 at 06:26 PM.

Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •