Public forum superiority.

Overview:In this debate I will draw on my involvement with LD, policy, and public forum debate as a judge and competitor to inform my arguments. While I believe that involvement in any sort of organized debate(including debate.org) is immensely beneficial to both the individual and society at large, the structure and culture of public forum debate hinder the usefulness of the activity of debate. It is my position that both LD and policy are vastly superior to public forum, but for the purpose of this debate I will focus my arguments on policy debate.1. Educationa. The year-long topic requires a greater depth of knowledge than bi-weekly topics. Cases are developed and refined over the course of a year. Students learn which policy plans are better as well-evidenced and strong positions are proven through competition.b. Year-long topic teaches students how to refine and develop arguments, as well as how to predict arguments that will be made against them.c. The longer speech times of policy debate (8 min) compared to PF (4 min), and faster pace allows for in-depth comparison of evidence. Students wrangle over the details of arguments, learning not only about the topic but also how to critically engage with evidence. A debate I judged this year featured an intense battle about whether or not high speed rail reduced CO2 by focusing on whether the studies involved accounted for empty train cars. Public forum not only does not engage evidence comparison, but could not. The speeches are simply too short to allow for in depth analysis.d. Pro’s analysis of topic breadth is laughable- having more resolutions does not automatically grant breadth of knowledge. Under the one policy resolution this year I have heard cases on dredging ports, Native American rights, use of solar panels in roadways, high speed rail, and much more. This year I have heard debates about Nietzsche, immigration policy, Buy American provisions, US budget negotiations, and MUCH MORE.e. The real educational depth of policy debate comes from the emphasis of evidence. Debaters must research evidence by reading academic journals, keeping up with the news, and constantly refining their arguments to include the best information availablef. Apparently Pro thinks U.S. Infrastructure isn’t something that “actually affects society.” Maybe if he did policy debate he would be educated enough to know that the U.S. is facing a long list of infrastructure problems that cost the U.S. economy trillions annually and are causing manufacturers to move overseas [1].2. Researcha. A year long topic requires greater depth of knowledge. Debaters spend all summer researching the topic and continue research throughout the debate season.b. Policy debate values evidence more than public forum. Policy teams bring large volumes of evidence to debates and debate rounds often hinge on a judge reading evidence post-round to resolve disputes. Policy debate evidence frequently draws on academic journals and think tank studies. Public forum relies minimally on evidence, with evidence often consisting of only a few out of context sentences from a major news publication.c. Longer speech time, combined with the faster pace allows for a wider range of arguments to be made. A single debate round might include arguments about which presidential candidate is best, whether U.S. hegemony is desirable, and the problems with capitalism. Policy debaters must draw on a broad range of resources when researching, teaching them how to analyze evidence from multi-disciplinary backgrounds.d. Longer speeches allow debaters to pick apart conflicting evidence in-round; rounds may be decided based on the quality of evidence. This creates a strong motivation to find the best evidence possible on a given topic.e. Research skills are a core skill for students; well-developed research skills put policy debaters ahead of the curve when it comes to writing papers for schools, writing grant proposals for graduate research, and completing challenging projects. Research skills are an important multi-disciplinary professional skill; doctors, lawyers, engineers, and teachers all rely on research skills to be successful. The ability to effectively research is also key to personal growth, enabling citizens to educate themselves and synthesize information efficiently.3. Organizationa. The large volume of evidence and the fast-pace nature of policy debate make organizational skills a necessity for debaters. Individual pieces of evidence must be categorized and prioritized within a system of thousands of other pieces of evidence to allow immediate access during a round.b. Public forum involves little evidence and creates no need for organization.c. Organization is key to scholastic and professional success. The ability to manage information improves the efficiency of individuals.4. Work Ethica. Policy debate requires a large amount of preparation outside of competition. The volume of research and broad range of information debaters are responsible for makes policy debate a massive time commitment. Success hinges on preparation; debaters spend time thinking up all possible answer to arguments, researching those answers, then creating debate files for easy access in-round. Debaters who commit their time and energy to policy debate realize tangible rewards in the form of speaker awards and tournament wins.b. The work required for policy debate stems from the focus on evidence and rigorous logical argumentation. Public forum’s focus on superficial easily accessible argumentation pushes fails to generate a comparable need for preparation.c. Work ethic underlies all of human success. The ability to focus on a task and see it to completion is at the core of humanities greatest achievements- from the Empire State Building to the U.S. Constitution.5. Persuasivenessa. The most important aspect of persuasion is the ability to present a clear and logical case, it is the pre-requisite to persuasiveness. A witty orator will persuade no-one with an incoherent argument, but even the dullest genius will win allies with a brilliant argument. Kant is one of the poorest writers in philosophy, yet he is incredibly influential due to the force of his arguments.b. Pro concedes that policy debate better focuses on “winning argumentation,” demonstrating policy better teaches persuasion.c. The use of jargon in a debate round doesn’t render a debater incapable of speaking normally in other situations. Speed and jargon are a way of speaking more efficiently and is situation dependent; I used to spread policy style but I am capable of communicating quite clearly.d. Policy debate incorporates both lay judges and policy veterans, ensuring that debaters know both how to engage in both hyper-technical and clear everyday argumentation. Judge adaptation is a topic frequently discussed in the policy debate world. Policy debate incorporates the best of both worlds, while public forum takes the worst.e. Pro outright says public forum teaches how to “appear” to win an argument. Public forum’s focus on superficial argument teaches debaters how to be charming snake oil salesmen. This might benefit individuals by teaching them how to be manipulative, but it hurts society as a whole. The common complaint that US presidential debates are just a chance for candidates to swap BS is indicative of the type of debate public forum teaches.f. Worst of all, public forum teaches debaters that they ought to value “appearing” to win over actually winning an argument. The fact that Pro takes it as obvious that we should prefer the ability to be rhetorically manipulative over the ability to construct thorough arguments is indicative of the damage public forum does to its participants. This is no hypothetical example- Pro is proof that Public Forum teaches that it is better to appear to be right than to actually be right. [1]http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...