Samuel, what is the impact of your last paragraph on the art of debate in education today? Ought we not ask students to defend untrue things to avoid the pride of manipulation of language to private ends? Or are you just saying the student should be made aware of how the skill of debate can be misused?
I haven't quite figured this out. The advantage of teaching students to debate from a side they don't agree with is that it allows them to seriously engage with and understand an opposing viewpoint, which can teach them to have grace with opponents. We must emphasize, however, that arguing a viewpoint they do not agree with is to provide a technical skill. The problem is when "offering the other side" becomes a higher virtue than seeking truth. This seems to git the tendency of deconstructionists, who prize varying viewpoints inherently.
Samuel, what is the impact of your last paragraph on the art of debate in education today? Ought we not ask students to defend untrue things to avoid the pride of manipulation of language to private ends? Or are you just saying the student should be made aware of how the skill of debate can be misused?
I haven't quite figured this out. The advantage of teaching students to debate from a side they don't agree with is that it allows them to seriously engage with and understand an opposing viewpoint, which can teach them to have grace with opponents. We must emphasize, however, that arguing a viewpoint they do not agree with is to provide a technical skill. The problem is when "offering the other side" becomes a higher virtue than seeking truth. This seems to git the tendency of deconstructionists, who prize varying viewpoints inherently.