Numbness: Unresponsiveness of Debaters to Any Appeal

Posted on February 3, 2010

0


It is midweek and too early in the morning for this. Nonetheless, it still baffles me. A man with full of white hair whom is not even 30 years old yet, stated something that is so divine. It exceeded my expectations of men with white hair. This amazing phenomenon may be due to his habit of consuming Viagra religiously. It boosts not only his male drives as well as the neurons in his brain. Viagra has made the pinwheel to go off at every direction in his brain. It truly is the most amazing statement of the month that I have heard by far. “Numbness is a heavenly godlike state”, said the man full of white hair with a straight po,po,po,poker face! (Lady Gaga, 2009).

Numb-ness (Noun) A state of deadness, paralysis, insensitivity, dullness, torpor, insensibility, emotionally unresponsive and indifferent to yet another appeal.

God-like (adj). Being or having the nature of a god.

The given statement and definition above somehow resembles debaters. Debaters are a group of people whom are emotionally unresponsive to any yawns, disgruntled faces, and dry jokes made by the opponents. They show no mercy, neither feeling a wee bit sympathy nor empathy towards the novice debaters be it in a tournament or the debate training. I am no Punxsutawney Phil, and don’t care much for the men in high hats who awkwardly kept my fellow groundhog aloft at a safe distance from their coats, but I did see my shadow today and, I hate to tell you, it is human, and so are you, fellow debaters!

We, animals, are often said to be like humans in our bodies, but very unlike them in our minds. People keep repeating this despite all of the contradictory evidence. I am referring to the evidence for nice, helpful, cooperative behavior by animals. We may not be human, but it seems we can be as humane as the next Homo empathicus. So godlike debaters? Hmmmm….

It was necessary, therefore, that we participate in experiments that measure our empathy. This can be done, for example, by giving one debater an access to a key that could unlock a door for another debater, behind which there are Zeus’s thunderbolts and Hercules’s white stallion, Arion. Would the one debater help the other to get the goodies? Or another monkey debater is given the option to either get the goodies for himself only or for himself as well as another monkey debater at the same time. Would the monkey prefer to share?

This has implications on the debating culture because all too often debaters start from the assumption that debate needs to be structured around winning the tournament at all possible costs. Along the road, debaters seem to lose track on the fundamental aspect of debating: sharing of knowledge. Too bad if some people, usually the young’uns, have no health insurance to cover for any mental injury or damage caused from debating, so the argument goes, so long as those who can afford it do. Hence, MUDL would be the best place to start imparts knowledge continuously thus may lead the way back to basic: to impart and share knowledge.

Please visit http://www.mudl.wordpress.com for more info

Advertisements