|
Category: Education Knowledge about the past is usefull to complete our knowledge of the world we live inThis debate began on Sunday, July 27, 2008, 8:20:40 AM Pacific Time.
Pro ~ Round 1
Knowledge of the past is as important as all the knowledge we are getting in our daily life.it is cause of this knowledge that we are able to develop our current knowledge to the next level. Con ~ Round 1
I negate: knowledge about the past is usefull to complete our knowledge of the world we live in My Reason for negation: Knowledge about the past is not just useful it is necessary. Thus I negate. Contention I: Past knowledge is necessary. To get to the point of knowledge now, we need past knowledge. If we did not, then all knowledge now would go backwards, and there would be no advancement. If we didn't learn about the wheel, then we would have no cars. If we didn't learn basic farming techniques, there would be no farming industry. The list goes on and on. To get to where we are now, then the past is necessary not just useful. Thank you ladies and gentlemen. Pro ~ Round 2
This round was forfeited because the debater did not post their argument within the allotted time. Con ~ Round 2
Extend my arguments. ^^ Character length.....length, length, length, length, length, length, length, length, length, length, length, length Pro ~ Round 3
This round was forfeited because the debater did not post their argument within the allotted time. Con ~ Round 3
Extend my arguments. [Voting Issues] 1) Contention I 2) Resolution is negated off of the premise that knowledge about the past is a necessity rather then just a utility. Thank you ladies and gentlemen. Member Comments (15)Only members can post comments. I have to vote PRO despite you clever tactics CiRrO, and don't get me wrong they were clever. "the past is necessary not just useful." "I negate: knowledge about the past is usefull to complete our knowledge of the world we live in" CiRrO you never proved the claim that you attempted to negate. Showing that knowledge of the past is necessary does not prove that it isn't useful. You never intended to negate that the knowledge was JUST useful. Your goal was to negate the fact that it was useful at all. 2 Weeks Ago
This debate is bogus and moot since the contester only agreed... and thus didnt contest... the intention of this debate was not met. The contester only diverted the debate to an alternative issue: how significant is knowledge of the past? The issue "is knowledge of the past significant" was completely ignored by the contester... (Does this constitute abuse on this forum? Because it certainly is poor rhetoric) 2 Weeks Ago
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||