Negative Case for debate ‘08
Pragmatism: A practical, matter-of-fact way of approaching or assessing situations or of solving problems. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
pragmatism
noun [U] MAINLY APPROVING
when you deal with a problem in a realistic way rather than obeying fixed theories, ideas or rules:
Cambridge online dictionary
Idealism: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Conflict: A state of open, often prolonged fighting; a battle or war. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Progress:
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Henry Louis Mencken, a critic of American life during the 1920’s once said, “Whenever one comes to close grips with so-called idealism, as in war time, one is shocked by its rascality.”
We ought to negate the resolution which states that “When in conflict, idealism ought to be valued above pragmatism.” I believe that because of my value, progress we should negate the resolution because pragmatism, which is defined as “A practical, matter-of-fact way of approaching or assessing situations or of solving problems,” upholds progress better than idealism, which is defined as “Pursuit of one's ideals.”
Progress, “Movement, as toward a goal; advance,” ought to be valued above other values because everything changes. Progress is a beneficial change and should be looked upon as a thing that ought to be striven for.
Contention 1: Ideals (can not progress)are not realized until acted upon. (ex. Runner, can’t get to end of the race w/o actually running) Ideals are just ideas until put into practice. They do not accomplish anything until they are realized through practical actions. Thus, we must allow for practical reaching of a goal. Consider a two people who decide to enter a race. One is an idealist, the other a pragmatist. Both have a goal: to win the race. However, the idealist, plans and thinks about running and training and does no actual running. On the day of the race, he, of course, is the last one to finish, exhausted and panting. On the other hand, the pragmatist comes in first place, because he trained and through practical application, made progress towards his goal.
Contention 2: Pragmatism is flexible. Flexibility breeds progress. Idealism is rigid. Consider the Victorian era to the Modern Age. Often called the “Age of Innocence” was an age of ideals, which were practically unattainable. These rigid rules stifiled the young of the age. However, when the Modern Age did break, the unbreakable Victorians held onto their ideals, causing them to be behind the times and unable to keep up with the practical young people of the age who embraced the new and practical things.
Contention 3: When in conflict, it is important to do what is practical at the time. (ex. Atomic bomb) Harry S. Truman did this when he used an atomic bomb to cause the Japanese to surrender during World War II. This pragmatic decision may have gone against his initial ideals, but as he declared, “I am here to make decisions, and whether they prove right or wrong I am going to make them,” This is his decision to be practical whatever happens. This shows how important his pragmatic decision was, because of the conflict, Truman put aside his ideals so as to uphold what was right at the time. This allowed the war to progress towards an end.
Thus, progress needs pragmatism in order to flourish because pragmatism allows ideals to be realized. Remember, the runner must be running or else he will not win. Pragmatism is flexible, which allows the people who follow it to embrace progress, unlike the rigid, idealistic Victorians. And finally, conflict calls for us to put aside our ideals so as to make room for the practical realities, such as Truman’s decision to use the atomic bomb. Therfore, because of my value, Progress, we should negate the resolution which reads: “When in conflict, idealism ought to be valued above pragmatism.”
) (I listed them in a previous post), which one would you say you are taking in this negative case?