RESOLVED: The phrase "Equal Opportunity" refers to probability, not possibility.

Questions Pro said, “I am not going to bother refuting either of these until Con can figure out which definition he is arguing. “ Both definitions apply; the first applies to equal quality, and the second applies to equal quantity. Circumstances are a quality of opportunity, while opportunities are a form of possibility. (n) equal opportunity (the right to equivalent opportunities for employment regardless of race or color or sex or national origin) [1] To measure the quantity of opportunities one weighs the opportunities themselves, to measure the quality of opportunities one weighs the required circumstances. Both of these are taking into consideration when one tries to improve equal opportunity, thus both definitions apply. Pro asked “How was I ignoring the fact that improbable does not = impossible?” You claimed equal opportunity was referring to probability, when in reality it was referring to the quality of the opportunity. Both had equal opportunity in the sense of quantity, but not in the sense of quality. The circumstances changed, thus the quality changed. Pro Life Pro said, “Con states: ‘Pro life literally means in favor of being born’, Con completely made this up. His own definition according to what he provided is: ‘n favor of the period during which something is functional’ There is nothing in this definition about being born, it refers to the period between birth and death.” Life refers to the period between birth and death, while pro refers to being in favor of an action or proposal. Life begins with birth, so to be pro life is to be pro birth; birth being the starting point of life. Pro life literally means in favor of becoming functional, or in favor of birth. Pro proposed, “the point of this is to show that cherry picking a bunch of definitions for every individual word in this debate accomplishes little besides putting the readers to sleep. Con should provide more examples to make his point.” Life according to the Merriam Webster dictionary means, “the sequence of physical and mental experiences that make up the existence of an individual”, “the period from birth to death”, or “the period of existence”. [2] Basically the same thing I just said. Merriam-webster dictionary calls opportunity, “a favorable juncture of circumstances”, they also give an alternative definition; “a good chance for advancement or progress”. The 1st definition is relevant to the phrase, “equal opportunity”, the 2nd is relevant to the phrase, “window of opportunity”; both are expressing the same meaning as Princeton’s definition. [3] Reclarification of Equal Opportunity Pro says, “we would not say that the varsity team (who was losing) has an opportunity to win, we would say that there is still a possibility they can win. Opportunity doesn’t fit, because their circumstances are not favorable. Favorable circumstances are what makes a possibility an opportunity.” No, they still have an opportunity to win(unless probability is 0), but the opportunity is small (refers to quality). Again, probability = favorable cases / all cases possible. So if the probability is 1% there are 100 possibilities, and 1 favorable case. A 0% probability has no possibility because there is no percentile. Favorable circumstance / (favorable circumstances + unfavorable circumstances) = probability Favorable circumstances + unfavorable circumstances = circumstantial opportunities Favorable circumstances = favorable qualities 0 < Favorable circumstances = opportunity to win Equal Opportunity is used mainly to refer to quantity of possibilities, but it sometimes refers to the quantity of qualities. Equal opportunity refers to obtaining a career, being chosen for the career is the opportunity, and the obtaining the requirements are the circumstances. One may be given the opportunity to go to obtain the requirements; since opportunity is required for circumstance, and circumstances create opportunity, both opportunity and favorable circumstances can be used to measure equal opportunity. Pro says “We are the wealthiest nation in the world, we have a strong functioning government, etc… Therefore the fact that we live in America is considered a favorable circumstance which leads to the possibility of our success. Even people born in the worst neighborhoods, live under this favorable circumstance, so succeeding in America is still considered an opportunity that we all share.” That is based purely on speculation, and is extremely faulty logic. In America we have an equal opportunity to advance our social class; that is where the term comes from, not from an equal opportunity across the board. Different social classes have different destinations. The Lower class may advance to a middle class lifestyle, the middle class may advance to an upper class lifestyle, and the upper class may advance further within the upper class, setting a new standard for everyone else. Measuring a Possibility Pro said, “He concludes that there are 3 possibilities, which is supposed to affirm his argument. However Con never measured any of these possibilities, all he did was count the number of them.” Counting is measuring. If I count 3 beans, the measure of the number of beans is 3, if I have 3 beans, and the guy across from me also has 3 beans, we have an equal number of beans. Capiche? Pro said, “The point here is that the only way to measure a possibility is to determine its probability. This is a fact that Con seems to deny.” Pro ignores the fact that probability is measured in percentiles, while circumstances (the quality of possibilities) are measured in units (as shown above). Probability correlates with the quality of opportunity, but probability does not = the quality of opportunity. If there are 100 possible outcomes, 10 possibilities for rain, and 90 possibilities for sun, than the probability of rain is 0.1 (10%), while the quality of the opportunity of rain is 10. 0.1 probability < 10 quality of the opportunity Opportunity has nothing to do with odds, like with probability; it has to do with prospects, like with possibilities. Pro claims, “There is no way to measure a possibility without referring to the probability of it occurring, because the probability is what makes it a possibility.” Pro has it backwards, you cannot measure probability without possibility, you can measure possibility without probability, but the possibility will be 0. Probability does not equal the quality of opportunity. Communication pro said; “Well, let’s imagine I challenge Con to debate me on the resolution ‘Mary is a beautiful girl’. Con accepts, then proceeds to refute my resolution by arguing that she is not a girl. Clearly this would not have been the intention of the debate” The resolution of this debate is, “The phrase ‘Equal Opportunity’ refers to probability, not possibility.” Equal being an adjective comparable to beautiful, while opportunity is a noun comparable to girl; the analogy is a red herring, with no relevance to the debate. This is nothing more than a ploy to distract from the debate. Equal Opportunity Pro says “when someone uses the term “Equal Opportunity” it is quite obvious that they are not referring to the fact that the opportunity exists, they are referring to whether that opportunity is equal.” But in order to measure opportunity it must exist. Pro claims “Since equal is a measurement of the possibility, and a possibility cannot be measured in any relevant way without referring to probability, it is obvious that Equal is referring to Probability” Measuring possibility is possible; To measure quantity you could count the possibilities, such as counting doors; to measure quality you can count the favorable circumstances. 1.http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... 2. http://www.merriam-webster.com... 3. http://www.merriam-webster.com...