CP demurs on extemporaneous computers. He disagrees with me, as you can see. I'll reply when I get a chance. First I want to think about what he's saying (which is unusual for me, but I thought I'd give contemplation a try, just in case it leads somewhere interesting.)
2 comments:
as
The original comment got eaten. Humph.
(slightly) Shorter version.
I was the one who so brilliantly signed his name 'anonymous' rather than my own a few days back on cheating with computers. Despite my apparent lack of talent, as one who spent several hours a week as a medical librarian in my past life (with the handwriting to prove it, believe me, I can find and put even exotic, unfamiliar material in context far, far, faster than virtually all students. Which is fine, as Palmer points out that is why they are students. I would like to think that at least many, if not all, coaches and assorted alumni are also quicker. Hopefully ethics is the barrier to their not doing in-round coaching. But not with 100% of them.
And yes, any debater or extemper who goes with the literal Charlie McCarthy approach is, well, dumb. But I can easily imagine people using prep time (especially with flex prep) do try to communicate with Outside Forces, such as a sherpa some bring with them to tournaments.
And, also yes, the 'best people' won't have to do that, and might even be disadvantaged to do so. As you wisely have pointed out (gotta butter up the host) the 'best debaters' win independent of the catagory of arguments they use, be they ever so humble, topical, or cumbersome. So if Sam the Kentucky Bound Debater chats with their Personal Sherpa during prep-time, and wins despite doing so, many of the lesser debating lights will do so as well. Just as currently these bulbs confuse the type of argument for success rather than the talent, so they will perceive that communication to be the key, rather than the talent.
That post is far too long as it is.
Post a Comment