Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Khasim Lockhart (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Jesse Hernandez (San Diego Christian College)

Judge: Susan Worst (Wood River High School)

Resolution: RESOLVED: The United Nations should adopt a resolution decrying or demanding an end to the annual dolphin hunt in Taiji, Japan.

  • Khasim Lockhart
    Khasim Lockhart
    vs.



    Jesse Hernandez
    Jesse Hernandez
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 22, 2014 01:57:48AM EST by Khasim Lockhart

    Citations

    Show

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/27/opinion/safina-dolphin-hunt-killing-method/

    http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1375863?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104045475633

    http://news.discovery.com/animals/endangered-species/un-court-orders-japan-to-end-antarctic-whale-hunt-140331.htm

    http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1375863?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104045475633

    Posted at April 23, 2014 01:11:27AM EST by Jesse Hernandez

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 24, 2014 12:27:40AM EST by Khasim Lockhart

    Citations

    Show

    http://understanddolphins.tripod.com/dolphinpregnancyandbirth.html

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/world/asia/20iht-dolphin.1.10223011.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    https://globalvoicesonline.org/2014/01/30/japans-taiji-fishermen-return-to-infamous-cover-for-annual-dolphin-hunt/

    Posted at April 25, 2014 12:13:00AM EST by Jesse Hernandez

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 26, 2014 01:11:48AM EST by Khasim Lockhart

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 27, 2014 12:11:48AM EST by Susan Worst

    Category Khasim Lockhart Jesse Hernandez
    Use of evidence: 4.2 2
    Delivery skill: 4 3
    Coherence of arguments: 3.2 3
    Responsiveness to opponent: 3.6 2.6
    Identification of key points: 3.5 3
    Comments: Your case flows well. Each part moves logically into the next, and you tell a compelling story. A bit more polish and energy will help you sell your arguments even better.

    You went long on your second speech... I stopped flowing you at 3:30. I didn't vote on the violation because Jesse didn't bring it up.

    You did a good job refuting opposition claims, line by line. Extending and cross-applying your opening contention that the act of killing itself is inhumane answers the final opposition contention and would have been good to do explicitly.
    While there is no specific rule requiring you to have or cite evidence, some things are more open to "common sense" analysis than others. When you are discussing science, you really need some evidence to support your claims. If a region with a similar dolphin population but no hunt had demonstrably lower catches of pelagic fish, that would bolster your argument. You need to cite credible evidence to make me believe that, though. Since you're asking me to judge the round on net benefits, it's especially important that those benefits are verified and quantified. Citations or it didn't happen.

    In matters of morality you might be better justified in not warranting your claims with evidence.




    The decision is for the Proposition: Khasim Lockhart

    Reason for Decision:

    I would have liked a bit more clash here... both of you need to identify specific points where you can refute your opponent's argument and do that. Prop does a bit better job on that aspect, but even he neglects to listen for or point out inconsistencies in his opponent's analytics. (If dolphin hunts haven't affected dolphin populations, how is it logical that stopping dolphin hunts will cause them to spike?)

    It seems to me that the core of the argument is never really touched upon. Prop says the act of killing is itself inhumane, while opp says that reforming killing methods will satisfy all parties. Both of these statements can't be true, yet neither of them were answered head-on.

    That being said, the prop did a better job of addressing opposing arguments with evidence, so I vote Proposition.

    Thanks to both of you for competing.


    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

    PHP MySQL SUIT