Dear all, Please note that you need to send in your draft to me for vetting asap. Darryl has already sent in his. This is ensure that you would have enough time to "digest" your arguments before your performance on Wednesday. I have attached some notes related to Point of Information (Reefver, this refers to a speaker interrupting another speaker's speech to raise a rebuttal). I have also included some notes related to possible rebuttals to be raised by the proposition. Look through the notes and give me your feedback. You may differ in your approach. Let's share and ponder one another's argument. By the way, I've not given you my contact the last time. Sun Yi has my number. You can send me a msg anytime today and tomorrow. I may take a while before I reply as I am currently attending a convention. In any case, keep those queries coming in, alright?
1st page and 2nd page: In general, POIs should be crisp. Two sentences should be the maximum, one if you can condense it. Some people don't like the "Point then Question" format, where you make your point then ask the speaker a directed question. Use it effectively, it can be very powerful.
POIs are not just tools to interrupt a speaker or randomly contradict him. POIs have very significant strategic value; you should know what you aim to do before you do it. Likewise, once you are a master of giving POIs, you'll know how to deal with them when you're on the receiving end.
POIs can be used as a tool of:
1. Distraction What? Used to change the direction of the speech. If you wish to prevent a speaker from moving on to their anticipated stronger ground, keep them on the shaky areas. How? Throw a red herring argument, one that is only mildly relevant to the point. Even if it's not key to your case, it prevents them from building theirs. POI: "Whether your case is valid doesn't matter if maids can never replace mothers. Would you see your maid taking your mother’s place, sir?” ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Contradiction What? Cast doubt on the case. How? Point out a clear factual error (and show how that contradicts or leads to false conclusion) POI: "Sir, the correct statistic is that LESS than 50% of Singaporeans endorse the idea of the death penalty, based on November 7th Straits Times survey. Where is your public support argument now?" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Entrapment What? This is a two-pronged attack. FIrstly, an innocent POI is used as bait to use against the speaker. Then, it is used against him in your speech. How? Question an underlying assumption for that particular point, in a way that you know you can use to contradict his other speakers. Alternatively, you can show that it is an illogical argument or shows some deeper flaw in their case.
POI: "are you saying that young children are becoming ______________ and _____________ as a result of them watching cartoons? “
His response: "Uh, yes."
then in your speech: "the speaker clearly illustrated their simplistic understanding of the situation. When I/ my teammate asked him in his speech whether watching cartoons were causing young children to become ___________ and ______________ , he said yes. Clearly they have failed to understand that simply because a child is ________________ and he watches cartoons, it means that he is _________________ because he watches cartoons. In other words, If I decide to go to Bugis after this debate session, I am going to Bugis later because I am debating now. It doesn’t make sense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. Provocation What? This is basically a very strong distraction. Bringing up a sore point or the 'dead horse' of the debate allows you to drag him back to the same old issues, wasting his time. How? The "Contentious point" is given in the POI, forcing the speaker to go back and re-explain. POI: "Sir, you are just glossing over the assumption that young children are _______________because of watching cartoons which isn’t valid as we have pointed out repeatedly in our rebuttal." For Provocation, lead the speaker to a very contentious area that has not been part of the debate thus far, forcing them to think of new material. POI: "The effort that mothers, both working mothers and housewives, make in ensuring that her children are well
3rd and 4th page: provided for would go a long way. How do you measure a mother’s love against that of a maid who is working for a living? The former is working out of love for the child and the latter stays with the child because she needs to work for an income."
It's obviously impossible to put those two on the same scale, but it's such an emotionally powerful POI, the speaker has no choice but to give some sort of lousy answer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. Ridicule What? Belittle an argument by poking fun at it How? draw ridiculous conclusions from the "implied logic"; POI: "Sir, your team is arguing for maids being better than mothers. It's akin to saying that maids can replace mothers."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. Mocking What? Make fun of an obviously flawed point (be careful with this one, don't ever mock the speaker, only the point he is making) How? Point out the self-contradiction or failure in a comical/mocking way. In a debate on removing racial profiling from airport security screenings, the speaker commented that every alternate person could be screened. POI was then: "Hmm.. search the Grandma, or middle-eastern male who looks like the middle-eastern males responsible or 9/11, UK july bombings, Bali bombings... Of course, i'll search the GRANDMA! yeah right, sir."
STYLE POIs must always aim to give the speaker some sort of strategic dilemma; put him in a fix. Make them think of answers on the spot, don't allow them to give you answers from their prepared notes, don't let them get away with the upper hand. so give them a point or ask them a question which forces them away from their material so they appear flustered and confused, and hopefully break their momentum.
Stops speaking 2. Uses his body language to give the POI speaker attention (he turns towards the speaker, he looks directly into the eyes of the person giving the POI, etc). 3. He answers the POI, directly. 4. He then finds a good way to connect back to his speech from the POI response.
1. Don't cut the POI off after 3 seconds. I have no objections to you interrupting the long and windy POI, but if it's clear to the judge that you did not give "sufficient" time to allow them to make their point, you may be penalised. Sufficient time is a subjective evaluation, so use common sense. If the POI starts with "There are 2 things wrong with your example..." and then you cut him off (with something like "no, nothing's wrong with my examples"), OBVIOUSLY you have no idea how to respond. As a judge, i'd rather see how you responded to those two issues than see how cleverly you can cut off the POI. On the flip side, if the speaker is rambling, please thank them for the point, paraphrase the question to something more concise, and then answer it.
2. Don't have a conversation with the POI speaker. Look at him while he is talking, yes. Let him state his point/question, yes. But once he's done, turn towards the audience and answer it TO THE AUDIENCE, not to him.
3. Don't avoid eye contact with the POI speaker. Don't stare at the audience, don't look at your notes, don't go to your table to get water. Give the POI speaker your attention and LISTEN. I dislike it when you disrespect the POI speaker in one of those ways, and then proceed to mess up your reply to the POI because you didn't hear the question properly.
5th and 6th page: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Here's an additional tip, when trying to answer a POI well. Listen to the question and learn how to (internally) rephrase the question to it's most essential point. What does the POI attack?
E.g. • If the POI is questioning the credibility of my examples - then i can respond by citing the source and providing other examples to show it's not an isolated case.
• If the POI is doubting my logic - then i should go step-by-step and show how no causal links have been neglected.
• If the POI is a red herring - then tell the audience why it's unrelated to this debate motion/case.
Learn how to listen to the POI to "get" the key point of the interruption. It'll help you and improve your score if you can respond on your feet to hard POIs!
When you accept a POI in your speech, follow these simple steps: 1. Listen for the key words in the POI. How can you tell what the key words are? Easy. if they ask a question, it begins with a why/how/where/etc - this is the first part.Next, don't get lost in their long winded POI. Keep listening to catch the subjective or contentious word, which is the crux of their point, even if they didn't intend.
For example, if, during a debate on THBT space exploration is a waste, you get a POI from the opposition stating "How can you claim that space exploration is a better use of money than cancer research?" the trick is to realize that the keywords are "how" and "better" so the real question they are asking is actually "How do you determine what is a better use of money" -basically. what are your criteria for prioritizing one thing over another for funding. Now, that's an easier question to answer. It allows you to look better!
2. Paraphrase (optional step. only if you need/want to stall time to think). Basically, you can choose to vocalize this "hidden" question we just discussed. Tell the audience (and the POI giver) what the question is truly asking. This gives you a chance to make the question / POI simpler and shorter, and phrase it to be none relevant to the debate if it was not already. It also makes you look much smarter for asking a more relevant and important question, and then being able to answer that question. Two birds, one stone
3. Answer this paraphrased question and then link it to the POI. In the example we discussed. Talk about your criteria for prioritization and state why cancer is below space exploration.
4. Counter-point /sales pitch. Once you're answered, use this chance to drive home your own case again. Don't just meekly go back to your case with no connector... tell the other team and the audience that you have (in the above eg) used a coherent and logical criteria, and that they have not got a clear criteria on their side, that they are choosing only to use emotive appeals with no logic. Put them clearly back on the defensive by twisting your reply to attack them back! When they corner you, corner them back!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There are times when all 3 speakers offer a POI to the speaker. Usually it's so impactful that the immediate reaction for the judge is "the speaker must have said something really stupid just now, even though i don't know what it was" and it's so intimidating to the speaker that he instinctively turn them all down.
Take one. Take their weakest speaker by directly addressing him/her (usually - although not always - the 1st speaker or the one who seems keen to sit down as soon as he/she stands up for the POI) and saying "yes John/Susie" so that you eliminate the chance of their strongest speaker taking the floor instead. The POI that he/she will make is usually not very hard to address; it's often some simple factual inaccuracy which can be tackled with my previous post. Their weakest speaker could also obfuscate the issue and
7th and 8th page: hence not make a very powerful POI.
This gives you two opportunities: 1. To defend the point you were making against what was "supposedly" a stupid point in the judge's mind just now, and 2. To attack all 3 speakers of the other team in a single response. Essentially, if you can answer the POI, it makes all 3 of their speakers look quite sillly for objecting so violently.
If your team is raising the POI, judges always notice when all 3 speakers stand up in unison, so use it sparingly, and never deliberately. if you are called upon to say something, it better be something powerful. you may want to very quickly glance down at what your other teammates wrote, to be sure that you have the best POI to offer of the group.
YARDSTICK ( Input for Speaker 2 and 3) Cartoons: Yardstick is “Cartoons has no negative influence on young children because young children watches shows other than cartoons so any conclusion drawn pertaining to a child’s behaviour is a result of the child having watched television, rather than cartoons”. Proposition needs to prove to you that cartoons have a direct negative influence on young children” in order for the motion to stand.
Maids: Yardstick is “Maids can never replace mothers”. So proposition need to prove to you that maids can replace mothers in order for the motion to stand.
Rebuttals
Argument (Proposition) Rebuttal They see material that is not appropriate for their age group. What is appropriate ? What is not? Please elaborate on what is not appropriate.
The Children who watch too much cartoons on television are more likely to have mental and emotional problems, along with brain and eye injuries and unexpectedly the risk of a physical problem increases. Young children watch shows other than cartoons on television. How can we attribute the physical problem to cartoons.
9th and 10th page: The Children who watch too much cartoons on television are more likely to have mental and emotional problems, along with brain and eye injuries and unexpectedly the risk of a physical problem increases. Young children watch shows other than cartoons on television. How can we attribute the physical problem to cartoons. Too many children are watching too much television and the shows that they are watching (even if they are cartoons) have become violent and addictive. Three major effects have been proven by psychological research caused by children seeing violence on television are that the child may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others; children who watch violence do not fear violence nor are they bothered by violence in general and the children are more likely to become aggressive or use harmful actions towards others. When we are born we have the capacity There are many factors that need to be considered in what makes a child turn out in a certain way.
Sir, are you saying that a child who is violent and watches cartoons is violent because he watches cartoons. Well then, if I have bad handwriting and I own a computer, would I have bad handwriting because I have a computer? The causation relationship does not exist.
Mental and Psychological Effects on Children who Watch Cartoons From the time children start school to the time that they graduate they are averaged to spend around 13,000 hours in school. This may seem like an awful lot of hours to attend school unless it is compared to the hours a child watches television, which is nearly 18,000 hours (from the time school is started to the time of graduation). This comparison is an outrage because of the amount of television that is watched by a child will have an effect on their brain, emotions and their sense to feel pain. The motion for today is “This house believes that cartoons has negative influence on young children”. Unless, you can prove to me that the mental and psychological effects on the children are solely due to cartoons, this motion does not stand. When a child watches the television, he watches a variety of programmes, from puppetry to adult programmes to documentaries, even. How can we attribute the effects to cartoons?
11th and 12th page: While no former study specifically relating to cartoons has taken place, multiple studies over the years have charted the impact of television on the minds and eyes of developing children.
When we are born we have the capacity for motivation, experience, and training, and because of this our minds are very impressionable. Therefore, our brains’ development is a dynamic mix of nature and nurture, so it is important to choose a healthy environment for all children. As a result, a tremendous amount of childhood involvement with electronic media can limit social interaction and may obstruct the development of a brain’s social systems. Sir, you mention that young children have the capacity to learn because our minds are very impressionable. In nurturing a child, shouldn’t we be allowing the child to adopt different modes of learning.
A child learns best from having fun. Cartoons such as _____________ and _________________ solicits responses from the children. They develop problem-solving skills, the ability to interpret patterns and so on. 2 birds, one stone. They learn whilst having fun.
As for the brain, there is scientific evidence that too much television can be detrimental to children. Sir, did you mention “too much television” or “too much cartoons”? I believe is the former. Thus, is of no relation to today’s motion because a child may be watching something other than cartoons.
The false sense of reality that cartoons show may in encourage children to try things that they see their favorite super hero do. Sir, how many of us have fantasized about being a superhero? I believe you have. We seem to be doing fine, haven’t we? Taking a child into a virtual world may be a way to help the child distress at times. This is especially important, especially for a child facing so much pressure these days.
13th and 14th page: A young brain manipulated by jazzy visual effects cannot divide attention to listen carefully to language.” TV is a very quick medium. Messages are shot at the viewer as if by an automatic rifle. Their minds must be equally as quick to interpret the messages, and with such a “two-minute mind”, many messages are misinterpreted, or confused.
Sometimes, subliminal messages (hidden messages) exist. Since we are not meant to know, will we ever know if we and our children are being brainwashed. This image can be present for only one frame, or 1/30th of a second. messages that they found hidden in a number of episodes Sir, today’s motion reads” This house believes that cartoons has a negative influence on young children”, not “ This house believes that the creators of cartoons have a negative influence on young children”.
It is the same as saying that medicine is bad for patients because some doctors who prescribed the medicine are not doing it properly. Thus, medicine has a negative effect on patients.
Simply because some doctors are not doing a good job doesn’t mean that medicine has a negative effect on the patients! Similarly, we can’t say that cartoons have a negative influence on young children just because there is speculation there some young minds have been affected by some subliminal messages.
In any case, Sir, would a child be confused or absorbing? It is confusing for me so I can’t seem to absorb what you’ve mentioned. A child will see an item that they want and will throw a complete tantrum until their parents give up and purchase it. (Eg. Mickey Mouse) Sir, perhaps you’ve taken a simplistic view of the situation here. A child can also be watching a puppetry show like Barney and insist that their parents but things for them. It is not a situation specific to watching cartoons, is it? Thus, it fails to show that cartoons have a negative influence on young children.
15th page(last page): A child will see an item that they want and will throw a complete tantrum until their parents give up and purchase it. (Eg. Mickey Mouse) Sir, perhaps you’ve taken a simplistic view of the situation here. A child can also be watching a puppetry show like Barney and insist that their parents but things for them. It is not a situation specific to watching cartoons, is it? Thus, it fails to show that cartoons have a negative influence on young children.
18 comments:
Hi! plz help me to win the debate!!!
Dear all,
Please note that you need to send in your draft to me for vetting asap. Darryl has already sent in his. This is ensure that you would have enough time to "digest" your arguments before your performance on Wednesday. I have attached some notes related to Point of Information (Reefver, this refers to a speaker interrupting another speaker's speech to raise a rebuttal). I have also included some notes related to possible rebuttals to be raised by the proposition. Look through the notes and give me your feedback. You may differ in your approach. Let's share and ponder one another's argument.
By the way, I've not given you my contact the last time. Sun Yi has my number. You can send me a msg anytime today and tomorrow. I may take a while before I reply as I am currently attending a convention. In any case, keep those queries coming in, alright?
Regards,
Mdm Wee
1st page and 2nd page:
In general, POIs should be crisp. Two sentences should be the maximum, one if you can condense it. Some people don't like the "Point then Question" format, where you make your point then ask the speaker a directed question. Use it effectively, it can be very powerful.
POIs are not just tools to interrupt a speaker or randomly contradict him. POIs have very significant strategic value; you should know what you aim to do before you do it. Likewise, once you are a master of giving POIs, you'll know how to deal with them when you're on the receiving end.
POIs can be used as a tool of:
1. Distraction
What? Used to change the direction of the speech. If you wish to prevent a speaker from moving on to their anticipated stronger ground, keep them on the shaky areas.
How? Throw a red herring argument, one that is only mildly relevant to the point. Even if it's not key to your case, it prevents them from building theirs.
POI: "Whether your case is valid doesn't matter if maids can never replace mothers. Would you see your maid taking your mother’s place, sir?”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Contradiction
What? Cast doubt on the case.
How? Point out a clear factual error (and show how that contradicts or leads to false conclusion)
POI: "Sir, the correct statistic is that LESS than 50% of Singaporeans endorse the idea of the death penalty, based on November 7th Straits Times survey. Where is your public support argument now?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Entrapment
What? This is a two-pronged attack. FIrstly, an innocent POI is used as bait to use against the speaker. Then, it is used against him in your speech.
How? Question an underlying assumption for that particular point, in a way that you know you can use to contradict his other speakers. Alternatively, you can show that it is an illogical argument or shows some deeper flaw in their case.
POI: "are you saying that young children are becoming ______________ and _____________ as a result of them watching cartoons? “
His response: "Uh, yes."
then in your speech: "the speaker clearly illustrated their simplistic understanding of the situation. When I/ my teammate asked him in his speech whether watching cartoons were causing young children to become ___________ and ______________ , he said yes. Clearly they have failed to understand that simply because a child is ________________ and he watches cartoons, it means that he is _________________ because he watches cartoons.
In other words, If I decide to go to Bugis after this debate session, I am going to Bugis later because I am debating now. It doesn’t make sense.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Provocation
What? This is basically a very strong distraction. Bringing up a sore point or the 'dead horse' of the debate allows you to drag him back to the same old issues, wasting his time.
How? The "Contentious point" is given in the POI, forcing the speaker to go back and re-explain.
POI: "Sir, you are just glossing over the assumption that young children are _______________because of watching cartoons which isn’t valid as we have pointed out repeatedly in our rebuttal."
For Provocation, lead the speaker to a very contentious area that has not been part of the debate thus far, forcing them to think of new material.
POI: "The effort that mothers, both working mothers and housewives, make in ensuring that her children are well
3rd and 4th page:
provided for would go a long way. How do you measure a mother’s love against that of a maid who is working for a living? The former is working out of love for the child and the latter stays with the child because she needs to work for an income."
It's obviously impossible to put those two on the same scale, but it's such an emotionally powerful POI, the speaker has no choice but to give some sort of lousy answer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Ridicule
What? Belittle an argument by poking fun at it
How? draw ridiculous conclusions from the "implied logic";
POI: "Sir, your team is arguing for maids being better than mothers. It's akin to saying that maids can replace mothers."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Mocking
What? Make fun of an obviously flawed point (be careful with this one, don't ever mock the speaker, only the point he is making)
How? Point out the self-contradiction or failure in a comical/mocking way.
In a debate on removing racial profiling from airport security screenings, the speaker commented that every alternate person could be screened. POI was then: "Hmm.. search the Grandma, or middle-eastern male who looks like the middle-eastern males responsible or 9/11, UK july bombings, Bali bombings... Of course, i'll search the GRANDMA! yeah right, sir."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STYLE
POIs must always aim to give the speaker some sort of strategic dilemma; put him in a fix. Make them think of answers on the spot, don't allow them to give you answers from their prepared notes, don't let them get away with the upper hand. so give them a point or ask them a question which forces them away from their material so they appear flustered and confused, and hopefully break their momentum.
Stops speaking
2. Uses his body language to give the POI speaker attention (he turns towards the speaker, he looks directly into the eyes of the person giving the POI, etc).
3. He answers the POI, directly.
4. He then finds a good way to connect back to his speech from the POI response.
1. Don't cut the POI off after 3 seconds. I have no objections to you interrupting the long and windy POI, but if it's clear to the judge that you did not give "sufficient" time to allow them to make their point, you may be penalised. Sufficient time is a subjective evaluation, so use common sense. If the POI starts with "There are 2 things wrong with your example..." and then you cut him off (with something like "no, nothing's wrong with my examples"), OBVIOUSLY you have no idea how to respond. As a judge, i'd rather see how you responded to those two issues than see how cleverly you can cut off the POI. On the flip side, if the speaker is rambling, please thank them for the point, paraphrase the question to something more concise, and then answer it.
2. Don't have a conversation with the POI speaker. Look at him while he is talking, yes. Let him state his point/question, yes. But once he's done, turn towards the audience and answer it TO THE AUDIENCE, not to him.
3. Don't avoid eye contact with the POI speaker. Don't stare at the audience, don't look at your notes, don't go to your table to get water. Give the POI speaker your attention and LISTEN. I dislike it when you disrespect the POI speaker in one of those ways, and then proceed to mess up your reply to the POI because you didn't hear the question properly.
5th and 6th page:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's an additional tip, when trying to answer a POI well. Listen to the question and learn how to (internally) rephrase the question to it's most essential point. What does the POI attack?
E.g.
• If the POI is questioning the credibility of my examples - then i can respond by citing the source and providing other examples to show it's not an isolated case.
• If the POI is doubting my logic - then i should go step-by-step and show how no causal links have been neglected.
• If the POI is a red herring - then tell the audience why it's unrelated to this debate motion/case.
Learn how to listen to the POI to "get" the key point of the interruption. It'll help you and improve your score if you can respond on your feet to hard POIs!
When you accept a POI in your speech, follow these simple steps:
1. Listen for the key words in the POI.
How can you tell what the key words are? Easy. if they ask a question, it begins with a why/how/where/etc - this is the first part.Next, don't get lost in their long winded
POI. Keep listening to catch the subjective or contentious word, which is the crux of their point, even if they didn't intend.
For example, if, during a debate on THBT space exploration is a waste, you get a POI from the opposition stating "How can you claim that space exploration is a better use of money than cancer research?" the trick is to realize that the keywords are "how" and "better" so the real question they are asking is actually "How do you determine what is a better use of money" -basically. what are your criteria for prioritizing one thing over another for funding. Now, that's an easier question to answer. It allows you to look better!
2. Paraphrase (optional step. only if you need/want to stall time to think).
Basically, you can choose to vocalize this "hidden" question we just discussed. Tell the audience (and the POI giver) what the question is truly asking. This gives you a chance to make the question / POI simpler and shorter, and phrase it to be none relevant to the debate if it was not already. It also makes you look much smarter for asking a more relevant and important question, and then being able to answer that question. Two birds, one stone
3. Answer this paraphrased question and then link it to the POI.
In the example we discussed. Talk about your criteria for prioritization and state why cancer is below space exploration.
4. Counter-point /sales pitch.
Once you're answered, use this chance to drive home your own case again. Don't just meekly go back to your case with no connector... tell the other team and the audience that you have (in the above eg) used a coherent and logical criteria, and that they have not got a clear criteria on their side, that they are choosing only to use emotive appeals with no logic. Put them clearly back on the defensive by twisting your reply to attack them back!
When they corner you, corner them back!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are times when all 3 speakers offer a POI to the speaker. Usually it's so impactful that the immediate reaction for the judge is "the speaker must have said something really stupid just now, even though i don't know what it was" and it's so intimidating to the speaker that he instinctively turn them all down.
Take one. Take their weakest speaker by directly addressing him/her (usually - although not always - the 1st speaker or the one who seems keen to sit down as soon as he/she stands up for the POI) and saying "yes John/Susie" so that you eliminate the chance of their strongest speaker taking the floor instead. The POI that he/she will make is usually not very hard to address; it's often some simple factual inaccuracy which can be tackled with my previous post. Their weakest speaker could also obfuscate the issue and
who is jollybean?
7th and 8th page:
hence not make a very powerful POI.
This gives you two opportunities:
1. To defend the point you were making against what was "supposedly" a stupid point in the judge's mind just now, and
2. To attack all 3 speakers of the other team in a single response. Essentially, if you can answer the POI, it makes all 3 of their speakers look quite sillly for objecting so violently.
If your team is raising the POI, judges always notice when all 3 speakers stand up in unison, so use it sparingly, and never deliberately. if you are called upon to say something, it better be something powerful. you may want to very quickly glance down at what your other teammates wrote, to be sure that you have the best POI to offer of the group.
___________________________________________________________________________
YARDSTICK ( Input for Speaker 2 and 3)
Cartoons: Yardstick is “Cartoons has no negative influence on young children because young children watches shows other than cartoons so any conclusion drawn pertaining to a child’s behaviour is a result of the child having watched television, rather than cartoons”. Proposition needs to prove to you that cartoons have a direct negative influence on young children” in order for the motion to stand.
Maids: Yardstick is “Maids can never replace mothers”. So proposition need to prove to you that maids can replace mothers in order for the motion to stand.
Rebuttals
Argument (Proposition) Rebuttal
They see material that is not appropriate for their age group. What is appropriate ? What is not? Please elaborate on what is not appropriate.
The Children who watch too much cartoons on television are more likely to have mental and emotional problems, along with brain and eye injuries and unexpectedly the risk of a physical problem increases.
Young children watch shows other than cartoons on television. How can we attribute the physical problem to cartoons.
9th and 10th page:
The Children who watch too much cartoons on television are more likely to have mental and emotional problems, along with brain and eye injuries and unexpectedly the risk of a physical problem increases.
Young children watch shows other than cartoons on television. How can we attribute the physical problem to cartoons.
Too many children are watching too much television and the shows that they are watching (even if they are cartoons) have become violent and addictive.
Three major effects have been proven by psychological research caused by children seeing violence on television are that the child may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others; children who watch violence do not fear violence nor are they bothered by violence in general and the children are more likely to become aggressive or use harmful actions towards others. When we are born we have the capacity There are many factors that need to be considered in what makes a child turn out in a certain way.
Sir, are you saying that a child who is violent and watches cartoons is violent because he watches cartoons. Well then, if I have bad handwriting and I own a computer, would I have bad handwriting because I have a computer? The causation relationship does not exist.
Mental and Psychological Effects on Children who Watch Cartoons From the time children start school to the time that they graduate they are averaged to spend around 13,000 hours in school. This may seem like an awful lot of hours to attend
school unless it is compared to the hours a child watches television, which is nearly 18,000 hours (from the time school is started to the time of graduation). This comparison is an outrage because of the amount of television that is watched by a child will have an effect on their brain, emotions and their sense to feel pain. The motion for today is “This house believes that cartoons has negative influence on young children”. Unless, you can prove to me that the mental and psychological effects on the children are solely due to cartoons, this motion does not stand. When a child watches the television, he watches a variety of programmes, from puppetry to adult programmes to documentaries, even. How can we attribute the effects to cartoons?
i m going out soon.
can we chat yet?
11th and 12th page:
While no former study specifically relating to cartoons has taken place, multiple studies over the years have charted the impact of television on the minds and eyes of developing children.
When we are born we have the capacity for motivation, experience, and training, and because of this our minds are very impressionable. Therefore, our brains’ development is a dynamic mix of nature and nurture, so it is important to choose a healthy environment for all children. As a result, a tremendous amount of childhood involvement with electronic media can limit social interaction and may obstruct the development of a brain’s social systems.
Sir, you mention that young children have the capacity to learn because our minds are very impressionable. In nurturing a child, shouldn’t we be allowing the child to adopt different modes of learning.
A child learns best from having fun. Cartoons such as _____________ and _________________ solicits responses from the children. They develop problem-solving skills, the ability to interpret patterns and so on. 2 birds, one stone. They learn whilst having fun.
As for the brain, there is scientific evidence that too much television can be detrimental to children. Sir, did you mention “too much television” or “too much cartoons”? I believe is the former. Thus, is of no relation to today’s motion because a child may be watching something other than cartoons.
The false sense of reality that cartoons show may in encourage children to try things that they see their favorite super hero do. Sir, how many of us have fantasized about being a superhero? I believe you have. We seem to be doing fine, haven’t we? Taking a child into a virtual world may be a way to help the child distress at times. This is especially important, especially for a child facing so much pressure these days.
13th and 14th page:
A young brain manipulated by jazzy visual effects cannot divide attention to listen carefully to language.” TV is a very quick medium. Messages are shot at the viewer as if by an automatic rifle. Their minds must be equally as quick to interpret the messages, and with such a “two-minute mind”, many messages are misinterpreted, or confused.
Sometimes, subliminal messages (hidden messages) exist. Since we are not meant to know, will we ever know if we and our children are being brainwashed. This image can be present for only one frame, or 1/30th of a second. messages that they found hidden in a number of episodes
Sir, today’s motion reads” This house believes that cartoons has a negative influence on young children”, not “ This house believes that the creators of cartoons have a negative influence on young children”.
It is the same as saying that medicine is bad for patients because some doctors who prescribed the medicine are not doing it properly. Thus, medicine has a negative effect on patients.
Simply because some doctors are not doing a good job doesn’t mean that medicine has a negative effect on the patients! Similarly, we can’t say that cartoons have a negative influence on young children just because there is speculation there some young minds have been affected by some subliminal messages.
In any case, Sir, would a child be confused or absorbing? It is confusing for me so I can’t seem to absorb what you’ve mentioned.
A child will see an item that they want and will throw a complete tantrum until their parents give up and purchase it.
(Eg. Mickey Mouse) Sir, perhaps you’ve taken a simplistic view of the situation here. A child can also be watching a puppetry show like Barney and insist that their parents but things for them. It is not a situation specific to watching cartoons, is it? Thus, it fails to show that cartoons have a negative influence on young children.
15th page(last page):
A child will see an item that they want and will throw a complete tantrum until their parents give up and purchase it.
(Eg. Mickey Mouse) Sir, perhaps you’ve taken a simplistic view of the situation here. A child can also be watching a puppetry show like Barney and insist that their parents but things for them. It is not a situation specific to watching cartoons, is it? Thus, it fails to show that cartoons have a negative influence on young children.
i dun noe who is jollybean.But mdm wee knows.
I
Reefver tan
did not surf
the internet
yesterday
thus,not
able to
FIND
MORE
INFO
...zzz what time u leaving?
I cannot type anymore.Bye Bye!!!!!
bb
Post a Comment