How critical theory is radicalizing high school debate

Re:How critical theory is radicalizing high school debate by peterashford on Sunday July 30, 2023 @09:15PM (#36937834)

As someone with a degree in Philosophy, I'm going to disagree with you here. I've often found the best way to hone my own argument is to think about what someone would say if they opposed it. This helps you hone in on potential weak points, but it has also caused me to change my point of view when I discovered that my original viewpoint didn't just appear to have weaknesses: it actually was flawed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How critical theory is radicalizing high school debate by SiempreViernes on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:21AM (#36940306)

My central claim is that you were not taught how to find flaws in an argument by being paired up with a classmate and taking turns arguing in favour of positions like "tormenting Jonah to do gods will was justified", I did not say "pretending to hold a different opinion is never done".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How critical theory is radicalizing high school debate by peterashford on Monday July 31, 2023 @11:52PM (#36952077)

Hmm... The post you responded to - and you quoted - said :

"You can never truly arrive at or trust your own beliefs if you can't completely understand and articulate the best possible case against them. In order to do that, you must put yourself in the position of one who believes the opposite of what you do."

It seems to me that your post doesn't make the point you think it does and you ascribe a viewpoint to the post you're responding to which is not in evidence.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How critical theory is radicalizing high school debate by SiempreViernes on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @04:59AM (#36953918)

I'm not sure what you are saying, you think that post was talking of "beliefs" in the sense "opinions about pure fiction"? I'll also state here that for me "beliefs" about anything except fiction will by definition have the last turtle rest on the firmament of empirical reality.

Anyway, that seems a distinct debate from the one you opened with, that you were trained according to: > Students were paired off and given a biblical passage to examine, say, Jonah and the whale. One student would have to defend Jonah while the other defended, basically, God. After ten minutes, the teacher would say "switch" and they would have to defend the opposite side with equal logic and vigor. This was the making of a mind.

[ Parent | on HN ]