DDO Olympics: Nerd and Fandom Prelims

In the interest of simplifying the clash in this debate we must see that it is quickly boiling down to one of peace keeping methods that are valuing pragmaticism (borg) vs. individualism (Jedi). To start by going down the flow of her last argument:First, in the cold and calculated borg-like manner which she is advoating for, my opponent opens by assessing how ineffective the Jedi methods. To support this she turns to the example of Anakin Skywalker and his sad deterioration into Darth Vader, "He started as a child devoted to good, and no matter how much the Jedi pounded their ideology into his head, he did eventually become a Sith Lord. He was responsible for the near extermination of the Jedi including a massacre of child padawans." To this we need to turn to the following rebuttals:1 - Anakin does not represent someone following the typical Jedi method for establishing peace as even his training violated the norms of the Jedi tradition - he was claimed to be too old already when his training started, and Yoda saw a potential for him to go down a dark path. However, he was trained therefore he represents an atypical case. 2 - Due to Anakin becoming a sith, he ultimately ends up on the Death Star with his son Luke Skywalker and the evil lord Darth Sidious. As Darth Sidious was torturing Luke, Vader has a revolation and suddenly picks up Darth Sidious, throws him over the balcony inside the ship and effectively kills him. 3 - An idea to bring up now, is that my opponent is looking for a perfect system through a pragmatic and idealistic evaluation of these theories - assuming that the best is the one that has no flaws, obviously this is not realistically achievable. However, it is unrealistic to assume that things will always function properly. The peace-enforcing method that ought to be desired is the one that can be realistically enforced and best compensates for errors in the system. This is best achieved by the Jedi method because it is more flexible in how it allows for individuality. The borg method says assimilate or die - indicating that only by joining their colony are you in the right. The Jedi method does their best to prevent people from harming others, but allows them to exist in their own way of life. This can be tied in below to my progress argument. Next to evaluate her justification of effectiveness over individuality. My opponent looks at how since both the Jedi and the Borg "don't infringe on life unless attacked in a serious manner" they both value pragmaticism, therefore we must consider which does it more. However, this leaves my opponent with a largely unsatisfied burden - to show how if both fulfill the base-level of pragmaticism, why must we consider which is more pragmatic. For example, if I was evaluating the value of Subway vs. McDonalds and said effectiveness must be considered because both value provided food in a quick manner (true); however, the jump my opponent is making is saying that because they both value effectiveness, what is most important is to first and foremost look at whom is more effective and use that to determine which is the most desirable food establishment. Just because two entities value an ideal to a similar base level, this doesn't provide justification for that being the primary factor to evaluate. Furthermore, we must see that looking at purely pragmatic ideas are flawed because they take the value out of humans. It would be easy to reach pragmatic decisions that statistically make sense, but don't value life. For example, if effectiveness of promoting peace is all that ought to be considered, then one could look to how the scarcity of resources causes conflict. Therefore, it would progmatically make sense to argue for decreasing the size of the population (kill people) in order to decrease the demand placed on the resources so that they may be more peacefully shared. The reason this isn't done is because something has to be evaluated beyond the purely statistical/numerical value of an action. Due to all of this we see that the idea of valuing effectiveness primarily falls.Finally, I want to touch on how my opponent claims about the borg method that, "it is the best option in the name of science and peace" because this directly contradicts my progress argument, which my opponent has failed to attack. I stated that individuals are required for cultural evolution - this makes sense as evolution itself is based on the concept that favorable mutations appear in a population and then become popular; if things always stay the same they will never change. The borg system does not allow for this, while the Jedi does - given a long term implication as to why the Jedi method is more favorable. Having assessed the arguments my opponent brought up in her last speech, I will quickly address the taglines of each argument my opponent and I brought up in our constructives and show how they've been covered.My Opponent's:"the Borg have more practical methods of establishing peace" - First of all more than the practicalness must be assessed. Second of all, this assumes a perfect society and does not best allow for fluctuations. "The reason this is more desirable:The Borg can absolutely guarantee universal peace and scientific advancement beyond what we can imagine." - Assumes a perfect universe is attainable and won't ever reach oconflict, and scientific advancement requires new ideas which requires individuality. Mine:"The concept of individuality is an important one as it pertains to ideas such as cultural progression." - Progresion has not been addressed. Therefore I see that no other conclusion can be reached, but that the Jedi Methods are ultimately more desirable.