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: Chisato Yokota (Shorin Global) vs. Opposition: Clara Harding (Wood River High School)

Judge: Joe Leeson-Schatz (Binghamton University)

Resolution: THBT: An overriding ethical obligation to protect and preserve extraterrestrial microbial life and ecosystems should be incorporated into international law.

  • Chisato Yokota
    Chisato Yokota
    vs.



    Clara Harding
    Clara Harding
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 11, 2016 09:07:39AM EST by Chisato Yokota

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 12, 2016 06:59:15PM EST by Clara Harding

    Citations

    Show

    Packer, Joe. "NASA Astrobiology Debates Interview." Interview. NASA ASTROBIOLOGY DEBATES. NASA, 2015. Web. 7 Apr. 2016.

    DiGregorio, Barry E. "The Dilemma of Mars Sample Return." Developing Technology. Developing Technology, June 2001. Web. 07 Apr. 2016.

    Smith, Kelly. "NASA Astrobiology Debates Interview." Interview. NASA ASTROBIOLOGY DEBATES. NASA, 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2016

    Posted at April 14, 2016 02:34:56AM EST by Chisato Yokota

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 14, 2016 10:17:28PM EST by Clara Harding

    Citations

    Show


    Lupisella, Mark. "The Value of Martian Microbes." Exploring Space. PBS, 1 Feb. 2005. Web. 7 Apr. 2016.

    DiGregorio, Barry E. "The Dilemma of Mars Sample Return." Developing Technology. Developing Technology, June 2001. Web. 07 Apr. 2016.

    Posted at April 15, 2016 04:56:54PM EST by Chisato Yokota

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 16, 2016 11:11:18AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Category Chisato Yokota Clara Harding
    Use of evidence: 2.5 4
    Delivery skill: 4.4 4
    Coherence of arguments: 3.9 4.4
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.3 3.7
    Identification of key points: 4 4.2
    Comments: You should provide citations for the evidence and arguments you're making. I like how you outline your major points right from the start of your video. You should impact out your scenarios more.

    I like how you fight back on what is "intelligent species." However, I think that you also need to provide a counter definition to "overriding." You do a good job playing defense against your opponent. However, you need more on why your harms are larger / more important.

    Defending microbial life for human use places humans above the microbial life, which is the tension the opposition is pointing out. You also need to do a better job targeting "overriding ethical obligation" to prove that we have to put microbial life before all else.
    I like your defining of "overriding" since I do think that is one of the key terms in the resolution. I'm not thrilled with your humans better than anything else argument. I would also say that your opening speech needs to be a bit more responsive to your opponent's argument instead of just answering it holistically. Good job impacting out your arguments.

    You do a much better job at responding to your opponent in your second speech. You should read more philosophical evidence on the question of valuing sentient species over non-sentient ones.

    The decision is for the Opposition: Clara Harding

    Reason for Decision:

    I don't think the proposition proves that there should be an "overriding ethical obligation" even if there should be some some protection for microbial life. I think the prop does a good job at proving that protecting microbial life would be good for humans; she just doesn't fully defend why it should come before humans (ie overriding). I think the proposition could have impacted out why international law and cooperation is desirable even if the ethical obligation isn't. If there was more time spent on that portion of the speech I could see myself voting for it since it is not answered incredibly well by the opposition. Overall, I thought this was a good debate but I side with the prop because she did a better job at controlling the key terms in the resolution. Great job to both sides!


    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