Debate #1

Today was there was the Form 3 inter-class debate.

I, together with Daniel, Shu Wen and Melanie, represented 3 Balau.

Our opponent was 3 Angsana, comprising Andrea, Krystal, Samantha Cheh and Julian(?!).

We (3 Balau) was fortunate enough to be the Opposition team, which means 3 Angsana was the Proposition.

The motion was (in exact words):

Science stream guarantees a better future.

In my opinion, the motion is super biased. It obviously sides the Opposition (notice the use of 'fortunate' when I described our getting the Opposition side).

Debating would be so much easier if you could just tell the teacher (perhaps in language not so crude):

"This motion is the biggest lump of hogwash I have ever heard. Use your brain, please, cikgu. Tell me honestly, do you seriously think Science stream students are assured of a brighter future compared to Arts students? In that case, wouldn't all Science students be multi-millionaires and Arts students their servants? Because what the motion suggests is that Science students WILL succeed in life (it's like writing their destiny or something). This is called a Sweeping Statement. It means it's so general until it doesn't make sense. If it was written "Science stream students usually have a better future", the Opposition would have been facing a bigger challenge.




Wow.

Am I writing too much?

I gotta rest my fingers.