Debating Genesis vs. SNES in favor of Genesis...

[bbobb]

Teaching them about how to make your arguments sound better than the other guys arguments when the audience has no freaking clue what you are on about?

No, teaching them to research and argue over real issues that actually might mean something in their lifetime.

[gameoverDude]

With regards to Super Smash TV, "The SNES is what Genesisn't". This version is herky-jerky as hell compared to the excellent SNES title. Space Megaforce and Axelay also help SNES in my book.

But what about Gaiares? Only on Genesis. SNES also gets the short end of the stick when it comes to Darius. Why could Darius Twin not have had 28 Zones? One player Final Fight with a character missing is sacrilege. Special moves I could easily pull off in the Genesis MK1 took me until the 12th of Never to do on the SNES- the control is worse than Street Fighter 1 there. At least SNES MKII did make an improvement on that.

Early on, the 6-button controller gave the SNES an advantage- but when it came time for the Genesis to get SFII:SCE, that evened out.

Could the SNES have handled MUSHA? I have yet to see a game with that intensity on the system (Space Megaforce is the closest one yet still not a match).

[J2d]

Does Donkey Kong still look good btw? I remember when the title screen rolled like a poster over the screen and being impressed.
Maybe he should mention Virtua Racing, or maybe not..

[Grave]

No, teaching them to research and argue over real issues that actually might mean something in their lifetime.

Eh, my speech class had a bunch of "serious" debates, gay marriage, the merits of human cloning, etc.

And it was bullshit anyway. Sure, it was a freshman-level course and we weren't exactly super-prepared, any of us, but we didn't take anything more away from that than we would have taken away from this. It's just learning to prepare and research an argument that's important, I think. What's being argued is largely unimportant. I doubt anyone's going to reflect back on their debate about gay marriage in college and take life revelations away from it.

You seem a bit young to already sound like a crotchety old bastard bitching about the good old days and how college education has gone soft. Nobody cares.

Anyway, Peter had his debate today, and I'm not sure how it went. I'll probably see him if I go out for a smoke break anytime after midnight, so I guess I'll find out then. This morning I was sitting in the hallways between classes and I heard his opposition talking. He was a pretty disturbingly greasy fellow, and he was shouting on his cell phone about his points... sounded pretty disorganized. Hm.

[bbobb]

What's being argued is largely unimportant.

That's just the attitude that is the problem.

[Grave]

That's just the attitude that is the problem.

What attitude? If you know how to form a logical argument and plan for a debate, you can apply it to any topic. It doesn't matter what that topic is, once you've learned how to do it, you can use that information for anything.

I'm not sure why you can't understand that.

[bbobb]

What attitude? If you know how to form a logical argument and plan for a debate, you can apply it to any topic. It doesn't matter what that topic is, once you've learned how to do it, you can use that information for anything.

I'm not sure why you can't understand that.

I understand that and agree that is largely what debate class is about. But a point should also be made in the class to debate over topics that you should actually learn something about. You're in college to increase the depths of your knowledge, not to have silly arguments over what videogame system from 10 years ago is better.

[Damian79]

No, teaching them to research and argue over real issues that actually might mean something in their lifetime.

But if you do that, you would be presented with an uneven topic or a topic that people already have opinions on. Bias makes it hard to determine whether a person has argued effectively or not.

[bbobb]

But if you do that, you would be presented with an uneven topic or a topic that people already have opinions on. Bias makes it hard to determine whether a person has argued effectively or not.

It's the teachers job to ignore their own bias and grade according to the effectiveness of a persons debate. Having an opinion on something does not mean you can't research and present a clear argument for either side. And while some topics may be uneven, many are not.

[Grave]

But a point should also be made in the class to debate over topics that you should actually learn something about. You're in college to increase the depths of your knowledge, not to have silly arguments over what videogame system from 10 years ago is better.

For one, these are debates inside a class based on public speaking, not the main focus of the class. I don't think the teachers were expecting them to be the most 100% serious professional thing in the world to begin with. But I hardly see how a "fun" debate like this is detrimental while a debate about, say, the legalization of marijuana would be fine. Sure, you research the pros and cons of the topic, but I doubt anyone's going to be profoundly "increasing the depths of their knowledge" because of it. There's no reason people shouldn't be able to debate about something they enjoy, silly or not, as long as they're still learning how to debate. The very point of the debate was to learn how to debate, not to study the topic and take all that information to heart for future usage. The teacher decided on that, not the kids.