How To: Instantly Lose a Debate

Yup,
That's right, I know how to instantly lose a debate. I used to debate competitively when I was in school. Somewhere I have a box of trophies and plaques which should back up any claim I make to competence at debating. But today I'm not going to tell you How to Win. Today I'm going to tell you How to Lose. (and eventually tie this back to science, technology or speculative fiction writing)

It's easy to lose a debate. All you have to do is bring up one of the Forbidden Cases. These are cases (or 'debate topics' if you don't get the lingo) that will instantly polarize the room in such a way that the judges will have to give you the loss. I have seen this again and again in competition.

And I'm not suggesting you stand up and vomit in your first speech - that does not guarantee an instant loss, for proof look to the year Worlds was in Ireland.

More Below/Beyond the Link...


The Forbidden Cases:
Abortion
Euthanasia
The Holocaust/Israel

Some Non-Forbidden Cases that will likely lead to a loss in competition*
Death Penalty
Creationism in Schools or elsewhere
Marijuana

(*I should mention that these latter three are great starter debates out of competition to learn debating - just keep the debate on the floor - in other words nothing personal and when it's over leave the room friends. And again, these are lousy debates in competition.)

So why do the first 3 cases give you the loss? If it isn't obvious right away, then let me lay it out. People really care about those topics. Personal beliefs that have nothing to do with logic or reason.

In a normal debate tournament the participants are there for sport, competition, but not to actually challenge or defend their deep held personal beliefs. When things become personal all perspective is lost and the debate fails. This is why any government (case presenter in a debate) will instantly lose if they start a debate on those topics.

Now to bring us back to Science, Technology and Speculative Fiction writing.

Over at Space.com is a little bit of a bait/troll article about Wacky Scientific Theories.

Essentially the author: Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer, SETI Institute, discusses some of the wacky theories that he has been sent over the years. Ideas like:

"Aliens came to Earth a long time ago to engineer a new species, and Homo sapiens is the product."

He then goes on to suggest in a pseudo serious manner that these people pursue publication of their theories. Ideally in an academic setting, however like Galileo, they can also self publish.

It's mean, what's he's done.
It may seem funny, but most Wacky Scientific Theories are like the Forbidden Cases, people actually care about these ideas. Watch the discussion thread to see people take the bait.

Calling out the Crazies Proponents of Alternative Theories with a half mocking, half serious approach is not the way to win this argument. And it is an argument. Bad Science is a serious problem that will not go away because of laughter. Educate, Educate, Educate. Science isn't mythology, you don't need to have special privileges to understand it. You just need to learn.

What Seth Shostak does is invite these people to participate in the scientific discussion without giving them a clue as to the tools, resources and knowledge that will keep them from being dismissed or marginalized in that discussion. I would have liked to have seen Seth Shostak discuss the years of study and education that he himself went through in order to acquire the status and credentials he has in the scientific community.

In fact what I would have liked to have seen even more is Seth Shostak call for greater education in the Scientific Method, in the fundamentals of Observation, Hypothesis, Experiment, Conclusion, and in how it's used in science ranging from biology to quantum mechanics. That would do more to address the problem of Bad Science than any dozen or hundreds of rejected journal submissions and self published wacky ideas. (In Shostak's defence he did state that "Data" backing the idea is valuable)

In Conclusion:
Seth Shostak brought up an important topic to many people, but he handled it badly, so I'm forced to give him the loss, even though I agree with everything he says.