Maybe we should keep our entertainment to the actions and stuff, because then at least the other team can't fault our argument... as much. :P I'm sure there'll be some points to rebut, no matter how well we do, though!(or do we not trust me after the Negative team tore my original posts to shreds ::))
mornirkirara
In fact, in a way we are arguing for the same side: we both wish for this world to live in the best way possible. We just happen to see not much use for their technology in our world. That is what we are arguing truly correct?Indeed it is. Well put. :)
during rebuttal we could say that each team has a different idea of what Tech means. the two definitions were different.I agree with all of those points. :D Although I think the curiosity one might need to be a little stronger?
We did not say in our opening that we wanted to COVER UP the tech.
with the curiousity bit I'd say...people ARE inquisitive...the will develop the tech that is relevant to their lives now.
yes teknoguilders do enjoy their work but they also die younger and more frequently that others. There is a quote in Farseekers to this extent from memory.
We should add that we don't propose to "leave it in the past', careful study could be made if necessary as things are uncovered.
On a side note, I think we are doing quite well. Both teams really.I agree! I think we're doing well. :)
We may not necessarily believe what we are arguing in favour of, but we are coming up with some pretty good arguments. Well Done All!
Hehe, yeah, sorry about that, guys - although that really wasn't the point anyway! :POh and can I just say - I like how we confused the other team by changing Teaspoons to sporks - sorry guys :P we decided later sporks were the far more evil cooking utensil around ;)
mornirkirara
Hehe Zieria - typo checking would be very much appreciated (especially if I get my hands on it ~:| ;) )Hehe, thanks, although please note that comment wasn't directed at you - or at anyone in particular - it's just that I've done a couple of editing classes, so I'm pretty good at picking up on these things. :D
Well, I tried to point out that the Moonfairy said that (because I didn't want them getting into trouble) but they thought I was getting antsy, so I figured I'd drop it. But apparently N1 does normally get to rebut (as far as I could tell - although I could well be wrong), so I guess it's probably okay... :-?I just wanted to double check something.....
deb
was rebuttal actually allowed in the negative team's first post. in the guidelines it says that rebuttal of A! was to be done by N2. if so, we could call them on that as well.
but it's more that ignorance breeds misunderstanding - and we didn't say we couldn't make use of their knowledge, just their technologies.
Hehe, great to know! :D I'm still a little out of it, so I figured I'd better clarify, because I wasn't sure how my comment sounded. :P But I'm feeling a bit better today than I was last night (so hopefully I won't put anything in the wrong spot ~:|) but I figured I'm still better sticking with points and proofreading. :PHehe it's all good Zieria :D I knew you weren't picking on me (L)
mornirkirara
Yeah, I really have no idea how debates work either. But I did think that as we can't rebut their last point, there should be a point of ours that they can't rebut? :-/ I don't know.As for how debates really work... not sure. :P Personally, I think it would have been better if they focussed more on their argument rather than rebutting against ours straight away, but I guess it just means that they can't rebutt our last point? :-/:P I suppose we'll just see how it all works out in the end :P
MK
The affirmative team basically told us that leaving the beforetime technology in the past would prevent another Great White.I'd say they're putting words in our mouth...ah, I see a page back this has already been covered :) I'm just repeating things here then...because that's not what we said. We made it clear in the opening statement that the first speakers arguement was going to deal with a particular aspect but it was in no way *all* we had to say on the matter. The Great White was used as one example.
How can we be prepared for this if we choose to deny the existance of Beforetime technology?I don't recall we've said to deny the existence of technology anywhere. MK's opening statement;
We live in a society that is already quite aware of the evils that the Beforetime has inflicted on our way of life.To reinforce; aware. Knowledge that it exists (how could they not)?
Technology is a broad concept that deals with a species' usage and knowledge of tools and crafts, and how it affects a species' ability to control and adapt to its environment.I think "knowledge of tools and crafts" is our main point to respond to, as it's so very generalised that it's far too vague what is meant. (<although we really need to put it better than that ~:|:P) Also, maybe we could point out that in line with their definition, introducing NEW Beforetime technologies - which was a distinction we made for a reason - WILL affect Landfolk/gypsies' development, and as a result "their ability to control and adapt their environment". (And that may not be a good thing.)
Philosophical debates have arisen over the present and future use of technology in society, with disagreements over whether technology improves the human condition or worsens it.Sometimes :P I wonder that myself.
Neo-Luddism, anarcho-primitivism, and similar movements criticise the pervasiveness of technology in the modern world, claiming that it harms the environment and alienates people;
The term Luddite is a political/historical term relating to a political movement during the Industrial Revolution; it is primarily used to describe those perceived as being uncompromisingly or unnecessarily opposed to technological or scientific innovations
someone labelled a neo-Luddite might not consider technology itself to be evil, though they may believe that many technologies influence human nature in a way that degrades the overall quality of human existence[3]. However, most commonly neo-Luddites oppose the rapid adoption of technology by society on the grounds that such development's negative effects on individuals, society or the planet outweigh its benefits.
Instead, they argue that certain technologies have an inherent tendency to reinforce or undermine particular values. In particular, they argue that some technologies foster social/class alienation, environmental degradation...
Hehe, now it sounds like I was pushing my own idea in my previous post! :P I was thinking of it as your idea - I wouldn't have thought of it on my own - and all I did was suggested a possibility for a different music source! |:| :POh :D and glad you liked the band Deb - twas Zieria's idea! I must admit, my original thought was a little counter-productive :P
MK
Hehe, I love the sound of 'Luddites in Tights'. [act]has image of robed guys wearing tights, and dancing around and singing the song from Men in Tights[/act] Luddites: We're men! We're men in tights! ...*pulls on Lud tights* Oh, Luddites!
Agyllian
Dean (In any form)- Check