Prior Position: Before I watch this debate, all I know about debating is a tic-tac-toe game. We can only win on horizontal lines. Each team has to make arguments and response all of the arguments that the other has made on-case, then they can create their arguments on the off-case, by presenting as much information as humanly possible in the allotted time to back your argument. In the introduction, the podcast is discussing Ryan Wash’s story debating debate, who is a black inner-city student in Kansas City. As a word “Black” I guess that they are going to talk about racism, but the topic debates about “the merits of American energy policy,” which does not relate at all.
2. Summary of Proponent: Starting a student debate career in an inner-city high school, Ryan Wash and his African-American team students stick out in the debate community, this experience helped Ryan when he entered at a collegiate level. In the beginning, he learns all of the basic argumentation like impact analysis, the Toulmin model of argumentation, start to be ethos, pathos, logos, and he does very well. But after he met a senior student from University Academy, her name is “Marshauna,” he joined the fold of the Louisville Project’s strategy. He and his teammates used contentious debates against other universities in an unusual style. They always ignored the debate topic or allowed the issue to flavor the side they used while sending forth their sole true argument such as attacking the entire concept of competitive debate, condemning it as a racist and exclusionary practice, which they presented at every match, without fail.
3. Summary of Opponent: There is never really any voice to the opposition on the subject, and I feel like it sorely missed.
4. The proponent side won: The judge had decided the proponent won because there was no voice from the opponent. In the podcast, they mention Aristotle’s modes of persuasion: ethos, logos, and pathos. It seems like in the debates; the proponent has won on logos alone. What Ryan has done is introduce other aspects into the debate and in some instances has abandoned entirely logic by disregarding the topic.
5. My fact-based opinion: The main reason for the argument is not about racism, although it mentioned as being present. Instead, the issue addressed is that debate framed using what can describe as white culture. The minorities, likely Hispanics, Blacks, and Asians because that is not the culture they come from. Explicitly, the argumentation that leads these other cultures is belittled and looked upon as being lesser than white argumentation. Whether this new perspective is useful or not, from the art of debate is up for discussion. But we cannot deny that real-world contests, whether they are formal political ones or those among our friends, are not won solely on logic.

Post Author: admin