[Stephen M]

This is a forum specifically for topic suggestions for the test academic debates. If anyone has any suggestions, please post them here. When the moderators determine there is enough interest, a topic will be chosen (either by acclamation or poll, our choice ) and debate started.

I am interested in electoral systems, and would like to have a debate on such. Given that western-style democracy includes a party system, where candidates represent political parties, choice of party is an important--and often overriding--factor in elections. However, members must also represent their constituents, and in those systems where members are elected from individual constituencies, the two functions of a member of government often conflict. In Canada, which reportedly has the highest party discipline in "free" democracies, the party is put first (it is the perogative of the party leader as to how his party votes, and opposing votes in the house will be punished, often with expulsion from the party, usually ensuring the member does not get re-elected). So do parties (i) interfere with the representation of the people by not allowing the members fair vote, and (ii) put the power of an elective democracy in the hands of the leader of the [majority] government party? Or does it (i) ensure effective democracy by grouping like-minded members together, to better represent the people, and (ii) provide a structure to avoid endless negotiation and compromise? Having given several arguments for each side , I would propose a topic: (which for convenience I will state as an affirmative statement, rather than question or in a local format)

Representatives in an elective democracy should form parties.

Some corollary arguments--

Electoral System X (Proportional Representation, Single-member District Plurality [FPTP], ...) is the fairest, least discriminatory, and most effective way to represent the populace in a democracy.

The government should be allowed to close debate on a bill and force a vote.

As always, I welcome comments and further ideas.

[Robbert L]

well Steve,

We started also a more informal discussion on the local forum but I think that that discussion will stay between you and me, but I was hoping you would like to start one about Sports and Government. With the main question:

Does a government need to interfer in Sports??

Hopefully you like it

[Lia K]

I'll write my topic suggestions as statements to which we can then assign a proposition and opposition to the statement.

Weapons of mass destruction should be destroyed

Adult material should be censored

Plea-bargaining should be illegal

Courtesy of our little dictator to be Russell- Democracy cannot work, dictatorship is the only logical answer


If anyone needs clarification or specification just ask.

[Robbert L]

hey all,

I though about some new topics last night, when I bored at my work :

Royal families, should they be abolished?

Do colonised countries, nowadays or in the past, need help from their oppressors?

European countries united in the EU, but should they accept eastern European countries, which had a communistic past?

Does the NATO stil has it value, because the Warshau Pact came to an end, and the UN has grown more powerfull?

[Stephen M]

Great topics. When we have some more people coming in to the forum, one of us can set up a poll to determine which topic is most supported.

How about these--I actually debated these:

This house supports public broadcasting.

Civil disobedience be encouraged.

Robbert, I like your suggestion about NATO. I believe you are referring to (in English) the Warsaw Pact.

[Lia K]

I really like posts in which we can use historical evidence. So I really liked

Quote

Civil disobedience be encouraged.

Well, since you've debated those would you prefer to moderate, or annihilate everyone with your fabulous post?

[Stephen M]

Lia K said:

Well, since you've debated those would you prefer to moderate, or annihilate everyone with your fabulous post?

Perhaps I should moderate. Hmmm... I like the civil disobedience one also... but my debating partner (by virtue of being my partner) has also debated it, so perhaps it is not the best--given that he will probably be one of the first I enlist to join.

How about this one:

The internet be controlled by an international agency. (INTERNET )

That would be interesting.

[Lia K]

Speaking of the internet, what about something along the lines of:

The downloading of copyrighted material (mp3s, dvd rips, etc.) should be cracked down on. Not only is it illegal but it is morally wrong on multiple levels.
Not sure if that is perhaps debatable especially since one side would have the law behind them, and the other wouldn't.

[Robin W]

Tisk tisk Lia, not very original....stealing the ideas from debate

How about....

Legal drinking age in US lowered from 21

Legal age for sex be lowered/raised

Should Bayes Theorem be used in court?

Violent sports should be abolished
or
The broadcasting of violent sports should be banned

Did CBS have the right to broadcast the pictures of Princess Diana's death?

Umm....there's the more traditional ones, such as cloning etc, but those get kinda boring after a while as most people have heard the arguments before hand.

[Stephen M]

Robin W said:

Umm....there's the more traditional ones, such as cloning etc, but those get kinda boring after a while as most people have heard the arguments before hand.

I believe that, while most debates boil down to some fundamental clashes, some (like cloning) boil down to differences in belief. Many times these differences are religious.

It is pretty volatile to play around with something where people cannot get by the basic disagreement without getting metaphorically violent. A particular hot button is/was abortion: right to life vs. right to choice.

It all comes down to whether a fetus is alive, which is is hardly a good subject to create rational argument on (unless you are a biologist specializing in ethics )

Anyway.

Robin W said:

Should Bayes Theorem be used in court?

After doing about 5 minutes research into Bayes theorem, it is evident that this would be an excellent topic to debate--for university professors. Although I understand some of the math behind it, and can begin to grasp its application to legal evidence, perhaps a more simplified form could be used for this resolution?

If you are actually talking about the full Bayes Theorem, you must have taken a class on it or done some special research...

I like the ones about raising and lowering age... always have some really good material!

[Robbert L]

hey all,

Well it looks like Steve like my idea's of a topic (5 out of ten are mine )

Well I'll point out to some more:
Should other continents follow Europe's example and also cooperate?

Should countries from other continents be allowed into the EU?

Prejudice basis of discrimation??

[Lia K]

Quote

Should countries from other continents be allowed into the EU?

Did I miss something in the news, because I didn't think that was possible! Is it, because the EU by it's very nature is European, so wouldn't a country that isn't in Europe not even consider applying (that's if they apply, I'm unfamiliar with the process).

[Robin W]

Quote

Robin W said:

Umm....there's the more traditional ones, such as cloning etc, but those get kinda boring after a while as most people have heard the arguments before hand.

I believe that, while most debates boil down to some fundamental clashes, some (like cloning) boil down to differences in belief. Many times these differences are religious.

Exactly....

Quote

Robin W said:

Should Bayes Theorem be used in court?

After doing about 5 minutes research into Bayes theorem, it is evident that this would be an excellent topic to debate--for university professors. Although I understand some of the math behind it, and can begin to grasp its application to legal evidence, perhaps a more simplified form could be used for this resolution?

If you are actually talking about the full Bayes Theorem, you must have taken a class on it or done some special research...

That's kinda my point. I have no idea what Bayes Theorem is except that it can be used to figure out the probability whether or not a witness is telling the truth. It has been used in many cases and has found the suspected (or unsuspected) party to be guilty when they were, but the jury had no idea what the lawyers were on about.
The question would therefore revolve around the use of complicated methods in court to find the truth when really the only people who understand are mathematitians. Pretty much, in the cases where Bayes Theorm is used, the court usually ends up bringing in a university professor to explain to the jury what has been proven, which costs money, wastes time and is confusing. So, yea, I guess it wasn't a great idea, but I figured you'd understand what I was on about as I beleive you said you enjoy maths and probably pay more attention in the classes than I do....but I guess you haven't covered it yet.

Go here if you want to try and understand....(made by my maths teacher)

and if your bored and have no life ....this is quite interesting to skim through

Actually after looking for things to help you guys understand, I think it finally clicked in my own head

Quote

I like the ones about raising and lowering age... always have some really good material!

Haha, me too

(sorry if this post is useless)

[Robbert L]

Lia:

Quote

Did I miss something in the news, because I didn't think that was possible! Is it, because the EU by it's very nature is European, so wouldn't a country that isn't in Europe not even consider applying (that's if they apply, I'm unfamiliar with the process). 

Well I think that maybe in the future this could be possible. But this topic isn't running, maybe when I become a moderator i'll start this one, but I think this coulb be possible in the future

[Ibrahim S]

Hello everyone!

Quote

(sorry if this post is useless)

Very Funny why would you say something like that?

No offence but I don't think that a topic that you have debated before is a good idea *Stephen*, if you insist, moderate the discussion don't annihalate like Lia said.

Just talking about the use of Bayes Theorem, well it is already being used in criminal law and has proven to be quite useful in determining the possibility of things happening in a specific sequence of events, if its less greater than the "cut-off" probability then the suspect is guilty.

I havent been able to think of any topics yet but will do soon!


Ibrahim Shahin
Australia Science & Mathematics School
shah0035@flinders.edu.au