Here at Debate Central, we believe that part of what makes debate great is its community. We are committed to using the best technology available to bring debaters together to communicate, collaborate, and learn. That is why we have made the decision to retire the Debate Central forums as of this Friday (June 6, 2014), in order to encourage conversations to take place on the social media platforms you already use.

 

So, let’s be friends! Like us on Facebook and Follow us on Twitter. Then, share your debate questions, comments, funny debate jokes, or whatever else you feel like. Rather than waiting for a reply on a standalone message board, we’ll use the magic of social media to make sure your fellow debaters are able to see your input, share it with others, and collaborate in minutes, instead of days. Thousands of other debaters from across the country are already involved—you should be, too!

 

As always, you can also always send your private questions and cases to us for quick, confidential, personalized feedback. If you email us, we’ll get back to you with a detailed response within three business days (and usually, we’ll reply even sooner than that).

 

Do you have thoughts on how to make Debate Central more helpful to you? Let us know. We might just use your idea!

 

2 Comments

  1. Mike says:

    The definition of criterion does not appear to make sense. A criterion is not something that measures competing values. It is not possible to measure competing values, without appealing to a higher value. For example, how do you argue that freedom is more important than justice? You would have to say that freedom leads to something that is good, while justice does not. And even this probably wouldn’t make much sense, because the very term “value” is in essence a standard, which is how this site defines a “criterion”. When you “evaluate” something, you apply a standard to find out something about it. A scale evaluates weight. A speedometer evaluates speed. And so forth. A better definition of criterion is simply that which connects contentions to the value. A criterion is a characteristic of the value. For example, if justice is the value, the one could argue that respecting life is an important aspect of a just society, and that contention one, if it involves both saving life and the resolution (assuming AFF here), would therefore lead to justice.

    • Rachel Stevens says:

      Hi Mike, thanks for the thoughtful comment. While I did not write the essay you’re referring to, I believe what the author was getting at is not that a criterion is how one decides between 2 competing values, but rather that it is how one evaluates the relationship between the value and the rest of the contentions in the debate (and thus facilitates the weighing of the various arguments). In other words, I think you are both essentially saying the same thing, just using different words. I will look into rephrasing for added clarity. Thanks!

Leave a Comment

Acces Our Research

Health Care Policy
Tax Policy
Retirement Policy
Environment Policy

Learn More

About Us
Meet Our Experts
Meet Our Staff
Contact Us

Join the Conversation

Health Policy Blog
Economic Policy Blog
Retirement & Taxes Blog
Energy & Environment Blog

Get Involved

Attend
Subscribe
Sponsor
Donate

Follow Us

RSS
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

YouTube
Flickr
Helium


Copyright © 2011 National Center for Policy Analysis. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Sitemap