We should ban certain topics

Author: Bringerofrain

Posts

Total: 71
#61
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@fauxlaw
@Bringerofrain
Chopsticks are useful for all sorts of things.

But picking up food isn't one of them.


And there's a lot to be said for gender neutral.


Topic's author
#62
Bringerofrain
Bringerofrain's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 516
3
4
7
Bringerofrain's avatar
Bringerofrain
3
4
7
-->
@zedvictor4
Personally I use chopsticks for catching flies like the karate kid. Haven't mastered eating with them though
#63
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Bringerofrain
I am fighting hard to embrace the middle path
Imagine you're a crocodile.
#64
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Bringerofrain
Don't try by eating flies.
#65
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Not sure I understand what gender neutral has to do with eating. Enlighten me, pls.
#66
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
I think of chopsticks as merely the extensions of my thumb and index finger, actually, a greater challenge than the Middle East custom of eating with thumb, index, and middle finger, and at that, only with the right hand. I am left-handed, therefore, a decided infidel. Thumb and index working together, the sticks working to oppose one another, the thumb/stick rigid and still, and the finger stick closing on it, pinching the food. Note that the Chinese, however, do not eat rice in this fashion. They do not bring the rice to the mouth; they bring the entire small bowl of rice to the mouth and use the sticks together as a shovel.
#67
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@fauxlaw
Nothing  that springs to mind.


The gender comment was aimed specifically at Bringerofrain.
#68
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Bringerofrain
If people never hear extremist arguments, they will never be able to be persuaded to be extremists. 
But those arguments are out there whether DART allows them or not. The difference here is that this site provides  a great opportunity for them to be refuted.

I believe it was George Carlin who said “never argue with stupid people, they’ll bring you down to their level and beat you with their experience”. I love this quote, but I disagree. I’d rather gain that experience so I can beat the stupid people rather than running away from them. After all, if I can pin point exactly what it is that’s wrong with their arguments and phrase it in a simple way then I can better help the next would-be stupid person from falling into their traps.
#69
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
I love this quote, but I disagree. I’d rather gain that experience so I can beat the stupid people rather than running away from them.
100% THIS.
#70
Bugsy460
Bugsy460's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 7
0
0
5
Bugsy460's avatar
Bugsy460
0
0
5
-->
@Bringerofrain
The problem with banning these as topics is it doesn't account for kritikal arguments in a meaningful way. For example, as a proud Native American, if I wanted a topic around the critical literature of settler colonialism (obviously not reading a kritik against a normal resolution, but creating a critical resolution), using a topic like "Resolved: On balance, kill the Indian, save the man is a good idea", or "Resolved: The white man must take what is rightfully his from inferior natives". These ideas, while seeming to support the idea of white supremacism, would actually allow for an easy platform for me to critically reject a resolution. I'm a bit new to this platform, so I don't know how often kritikal debate happens, but banning things on the perceived resolution would kill any chance for kritikal debate.
#71
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Bugsy460
The problem with banning these as topics is it doesn't account for kritikal arguments in a meaningful way. For example, as a proud Native American, if I wanted a topic around the critical literature of settler colonialism (obviously not reading a kritik against a normal resolution, but creating a critical resolution), using a topic like "Resolved: On balance, kill the Indian, save the man is a good idea", or "Resolved: The white man must take what is rightfully his from inferior natives". These ideas, while seeming to support the idea of white supremacism, would actually allow for an easy platform for me to critically reject a resolution. I'm a bit new to this platform, so I don't know how often kritikal debate happens, but banning things on the perceived resolution would kill any chance for kritikal debate.
Well stated.