Welcome to SAIL Debate Class!
Survey DUE: 4/24
Homework DUE: 5/4
Homework DUE: 5/9
Pirate Parlet Pictures
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to
entertain a thought without accepting it."
— Aristotle
Click on the video below. Is this a contradiction, an argument, or a debate?
What is the difference between a contradiction, an argument, and a debate? Add your comments below.
Comments (35)
Ariel said
at 2:44 pm on Mar 17, 2009
This video is displaying what was an arguement when the two men were opposing their sides while explaining how their side was right, but as soon as they started to dissagree by saying yes or no constaintly persuading inefficiantly they were contridicting eachother. Throughout this whole video the two men never once started to debate. The reason why you can tell the difference between these three types of opposition is because they each have one characteristic that individualizes them.To argue you are speaking to disagree using a reason or point to go against something. A contiridiction is to say something in opposition, dening something that has various points. Also, a debate is very similar to an arguement but it is an organized arguement with two sides.
Claire said
at 6:08 pm on Mar 18, 2009
I have to disagree with Ariel's idea. I believe that this video exemplifies a contradiction because the two men don't give any reasoning...or very little reasoning....that supports their point. The men are just saying the opposite of what the other man said. An argument gives reasoning for you decision, and a debate is an organized argument that shares facts and reasoning that supports their position on a certain topic. Therefore, I believe that this video exemplifies a contradiction.
Quentin said
at 8:30 pm on Mar 18, 2009
I agree with Clarie. Plus, the movie actually sort of SAYS what it is, if you follow the conversation and don't listen to all those "yes I did!"s and ""no it's not"s!
Dylan said
at 3:51 pm on Mar 19, 2009
The man with the glasses is upholding an arguement wheras the jerko is contradicting everything four-eyes says.
Contradiction: The outomatic Nay-say of the other's statement
Arguement: A series of collective statements used to uphold a proposition
Debate: Civil discussion involving opposing viewpoints
Joseph said
at 7:18 pm on Mar 19, 2009
I believe that this skit is all about contradiction. Also, the skit was a contradiction.
Aidan said
at 8:21 pm on Mar 20, 2009
the men in this video do not argue instead all they do is contradict
contradicton: autamatic opisit of the others statement
argement: statements that support your position
debate: a more civilised version of arguement in a more organized statement
Daniel said
at 7:16 pm on Mar 27, 2009
I think that this video is representing a contradiction; one man is simply disagreeing with the other.
Contradiction: disagreement, where one person tells the other they are wrong
Argument: where opinions, and sometimes facts, are used to support one's point of veiw
Debate: a more rational, civilized form of argument, where facts are used to support one's peerspective
William said
at 5:15 pm on Mar 30, 2009
all 3. it di fit al of the catigorys
Rachel said
at 6:03 pm on Mar 30, 2009
Part of this skit was an arguement because he gave reasons as to why it was a contradiction and not an arguement. Afterwards, however, it was pure contradiction. Yes, no, yes, no, yes, no ,yes, no, and on and on and on...
Rachel said
at 6:08 pm on Mar 30, 2009
A contradiction is just saying the opposite of what the other person says just to disagree.
An arguement is giving reasons for your point of view.
A debate is a bit different because you use more sources and you argue in a more formal way.
France said
at 6:24 pm on Mar 30, 2009
i believe that a conversation such as this can be classified as both an argument and a contradiction, because both are aroused, acording to the definitions so many have given above. At one point someone made a comment about how they are just disagreeing with each other and, correct me if i am wrong, but wouldnt that be underestimating the situation-and by this i mean that an disagreement could be considered as any one of the definitions presented and that it would become terribly comfusing if we were only to say that this was an disagreement. Yet on the contrary, i infact would put these men's conversation as being just that, a disagrement, for the exact same reason that it is infact both an argument and a contradition that is far too imbedded to decide one way or another for sure, with reasons against the opposite.If you can follow what i am trying to say.Then again when Claire puts up the point that it is a contradition because they dont give much reasoning, but since there is even that small amount of reasoning present, wouldn't you then be forced to consider it an argument? and on and on and on... the posibilities are nearly endless to consider in such a debate(you would consider the above conversation a debate, wouldn't you?) if not i am thuroughly confused.
Hannah said
at 6:30 pm on Mar 30, 2009
I agree with Claire. Even though at first it appears to be an argument, the two dudes give like, no reasoning what-so-ever. It's just a tennis ball being lobbed back and fourth about wether this is an argument or a contridiction. No reasoning just one saying it is, the other saying it not. That's really all it is.
Hannah said
at 6:32 pm on Mar 30, 2009
I forgot to do my little describing thing.
Contridiction: Where there is no reasoning and everything is just yes,no,yes,no...
Argument: Reasoning and Points of veiw.
Debate: Much more formal and you almost site things
Megan said
at 6:25 am on Mar 31, 2009
I think it was an argument because they just kept saying yes and no over and over again. They didn't give any examples or facts to support their side. I could also be a contridiction because it was just saying yes and no over again. It was defenately not a debate because it was to simple with yes and no. A contridiction is saying yes and no. A debate is very sofisticated with sorces for the imformation you're using. An argument is where you give simple facts to your side and is not formal like a debate.
Alessandro said
at 4:53 pm on Mar 31, 2009
I think that this clip was displaying a contradiction for the following reasons:
Contradiction: A contradiction is just saying the opposite (or contradicting) of what the opponent is saying.
Argument: An argument is a series of collective statements to establish a position.
Debate: A debate is a more formal version of an argument that involves an audience, facts and sites.
Debate:
Eric Hamilton said
at 5:22 pm on Mar 31, 2009
Ariel, I like your definitions of Contradiction and Debate. Your definition of Argument is a little unclear to me. However, maybe after today you have a better understanding. I would like you to rewrite your definition of argument.
Claire, Very well put. You have a very clear understanding of what these two men were doing.
Joseph and Quentin, I'd like you to elaborate a little mroe with your posts. However, I do get your point.
Dylan, Well said.
Eric Hamilton said
at 5:23 pm on Mar 31, 2009
William. I have NO idea what you are trying to communicate. :-) Please try again.
Olympia said
at 6:18 pm on Mar 31, 2009
I think this video is simply representing a contradiction.
A contradiction is when two or more people are just disagreeing with each other. An argument or debate is when you represent something with a reason or a statement against a person/group who has an opposite opinion.
In this video all you could hear was "Yes, I did!" and "No, you didn't!" They don't exactly have a statement or evidence to support their answer.
Although, like Dylan said, the man with the glasses was kind of holding an argument. He was TRYING to show evidence for his opinion. The other man was contradicting.
Timothy said
at 8:06 pm on Mar 31, 2009
I agree with Olympia that this video simply shows a contradiction that has some arguments in the contradiction but is almost like an argument/contradiction between two eight years fighting over who hit each other first except that one has some facts to support his opinion while the other is just contradicting.
Tiondrae said
at 8:56 pm on Mar 31, 2009
This video is simply representing a contradiction, the overall theme is their disagreement. It was a toddler arguemrnt, no "meat", just empty statements that might break their way through one another's.
Heather said
at 9:49 pm on Mar 31, 2009
I believe this video was displaying all three of the types of disagreement. In the first place, the man with the brown tie askes the man with the blue tie "Is this the right room for an argument?" thus expecting to have an argument with the man in the blue tie. this is displayed further more, when both men state reasons for their views, for instance when the man in the brown tie states that they weren't together, just now, for five whole minutes, and an argument states not only a person's views, like no it's not yes it is, but what is or is not. meanwhile, they are contradicting each other. Straight away the man with the brown tie contradicts the man with the blue tie's saying he did something. the man with the brown tie had no reasoning for why he didn't think the man with the blue tie told him something. It is then, that they string together yes's and no's, or taking the opposite side with out actually knowing what the side was, displaying a contradiction. After a while i lost track or whether they were contradicting each other about anything at all, and several times did the man with the blue tie switch from "no you didn't"'s to "yes you did"'s. But what has been missed was the fact that the were also displaying a debate. A debate is an organized argument with two sides and supporting evidence. In the beginning, the video states that it was organized the the two men shall have an argument, or whatever it is they had, and then later on the man with the brown tie declares that the aren't having an argument but rather contradicting each other. with the man with the brown tie just stating this he would be arguing, but he supports his argument with evidence, the definitions of arguments contradictions ect. therefore i have come the the conclusion that the two men were overall contradicting, arguing and debating.
Eric Hamilton said
at 12:26 pm on Apr 1, 2009
Wow Heather! That is an amazing piece of writing. You are extremely detailed, precise, and evaluative. Nice job!
Eric Hamilton said
at 4:21 pm on Apr 1, 2009
Hi Everyone
I have some very exciting news! Several experts in the field of debate and logic have agreed to join our wiki. They are available as resources for us and have graciously agreed to share their expertise with you. The first guest you will see postings from is Zach's dad, Mr. Carlos Bertha. He is currently an Associate Professor of Philosophy at the United States Air Force Academy. He has been monitoring your comments and assignments. I have asked him to introduce himself and explain a little more about what he does. Please welcome him to our learning community.
Department of Philosophy
United States Air Force Academy
James said
at 7:24 pm on Apr 1, 2009
The difference between a contradiction and a debate and an argument is that a contradiction is simply saying the oppisite of what the previous person said. An argument is when no one supports there side they just keep saying yes, no, yes, no it is very close to a contradiction. A debate is when you argue a point using details specific to the point.
Carlos Bertha said
at 7:27 pm on Apr 1, 2009
Hi everyone. I am an associate professor of philosophy at the United States Air Force Academy and I teach courses in ethics, critical thinking, logic and philosophy of science. I'm thrilled to provide my two cents' worth to this discussion.
The first thing that comes to mind is that we should make a distinction. On the one hand you have an argument (in the sense that the client in the video clip means it): a series of connected statements that support a definite proposition. On the other hand we have what's called the "rhetorical" aspects of a debate. This rhetorical stuff is separate from the argument, but it sometimes helps persuade your audience: it help to get people to agree with you. It's like this. Suppose I said "I'm broke." Which way would you be more likely to believe me, if I said it with a smile? or if I said it crying? Of course, you'd believe me more readily if I said it crying. But me crying has nothing to do with whether what I'm saying is true. That's why it's a "rhetorical device."
For arguments to be "sound" (i.e., "good") they need to have two things. First you must sure that premises are true, which requires careful research. Secondly, you must make sure you have a valid logical structure, and this is much more difficult. For that, you have to make sure you don't commit fallacies (errors in reasoning), and that's tougher than it sounds.
I believe that it's more important to get the *argument* right than it is to get the rhetorical devices to work. In a way, if your argument is sound (good) you won't need as many rhetorical devices to help you sell it to your audience. That''s why I would rather move away from saying that arguments are "won" or "lost." Sure, "debates" are things that are "won" or "lost," but what I'm saying is that we should be more concerned with doing our best to get the argument to make sense than worrying about doing "whatever it takes" to win an argument.
Dr. Bertha
ZachB said
at 2:39 pm on Apr 3, 2009
This is, in fact, a contradiction. A long series of contradictions to be precise. Both players are guilty in this instance. A contradiction is saying the exact opposite of what the other person says. An argument is a series of connected statements that support a definite proposition. A debate is like an argument, but with structure
Doyle Baker said
at 2:14 pm on Apr 6, 2009
Hello all you SAIL debators. I've enjoyed reading your opinions about how a debate is won or lost. I agree with Professor Bertha that your primary concern should be making your best possible argument rather than whether you "win" the debate by changing the minds of your opponents or your audience. Depending on the circumstances, you may not be able to change anyone's mind.
As a lawyer, I sometimes find myself arguing for a position that I disagree with. In such cases I know that the arguments I make may not persuade a judge. You will find sometimes find yourselves in a similar situation when you debate. You will be asked to defend a position that you do not agree with, and that you know your audience will not agree with.
A judge before whom I appear regularly once said that an attorney might make a "better" argument than his or her opponent and still "lose" the case (that is, the court will rule in favor of the other side). Do you agree with this statement in the context of a debate? If so, can you give examples of how this could be so?
James said
at 7:07 pm on Apr 7, 2009
I agree with Mr. Baker and Dr. Carlos Bertha.
Doyle Baker said
at 7:46 am on Apr 8, 2009
That's great James. Can you tell us why?
Quentin said
at 3:46 pm on Apr 8, 2009
Well, The in the movie one of the guys said, "This isn't an argument! You're just contradicting me!" "No i'm not!" ....
James said
at 6:40 pm on Apr 8, 2009
well to win an argument you have to make the other side agree or the judge has to agree with your side. In order to win your probly going to need a sound argument. You might not but the more convising the argument the more likely you are to win
Malcom said
at 8:32 am on Apr 14, 2009
a argument and a debate are almost the same but a contridiction is saying the exact opposite of what the other person says
Max said
at 2:33 pm on Apr 14, 2009
That was contradictions.
Quentin said
at 7:17 am on Apr 28, 2009
Just a small comment... PBwiki changed to PBworks, so type in www.saildebate.pbworks.com instead.
James said
at 2:35 pm on May 6, 2009
dfjsdfjskf jsdklfjdsklfjdfdjfdfsdjdsfdsfjkjfdkjf
You don't have permission to comment on this page.