Intelligence Squared U.S.
Intelligence Squared <<pop: http:/
* The full Intelligence Squared debate is available at Fora.tv <<pop: http:/
Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates, May 18, 2012, www.iq2us.org
<<embed video pick-
Download transcript. <<pop: 21_ShoreFire Media_Transcript.pdf>>
Analyzing the Writer’s Technique
After watching Should College Football Be Banned? <<pop: video pick-
41. In this “highlight reel” of the debate, all of the debaters are arguing about the same clearly defined, narrow issue of whether college football should be banned, but each has a different position and approach to the issue. What claim does each debater make, and what is each debater’s approach?
<<textbox>>
<<Feedback:>>
Your answer will differ from this one in the way it is written, but it should include roughly the same information.
42. What needs and values did the debaters appeal to in order to make their claims? Use examples from at least two of the arguments made in the video to support your answer.
<<textbox>>
<<Feedback:>>
Possible Answers: Tim Green, a former NFL defensive end, appeals to the audience’s American values of hard work and determination when he says “it’s how much you can take and keep on going.” He also appeals to a value of education and of teaching youths these values to make them better people. Buzz Bissinger, a former football coach, also appeals to the value the audience places on education by suggesting that education is not supported when college football coaches earn five to fifteen times as much as the college president.
Thinking Critically about Writing Arguments
After watching Should College Football Be Banned? <<pop: video pick-
43. Tim Green and Jason Whitlock were both football players, and Buzz Bissinger is a journalist and author whose book Friday Night Lights (1990) inspired a hit movie and a beloved television series, both of which celebrate football. Do these men’s backgrounds support their arguments or make them biased? Consider each of their arguments and use specific details from the video as evidence.
<<textbox>>
<<Feedback:>>
44. Evaluate how effectively the debaters support their positions. Is the evidence they supply reliable? Would including other evidence have made each debater’s position stronger? Do the debaters commit fallacies? Do they respond to alternative positions? Evaluate at least two of the debaters’ arguments in the video.
<<textbox>>
<<Feedback:>>
Possible Answer: Malcolm Gladwell’s descriptive comparison of the effects of hitting a brick wall is compelling, but because he does not cite the source of this research, the audience cannot be sure the information is reliable. Jason Whitlock’s comparison of football to the capitalistic giant McDonald’s presents the fallacy of a red herring (distracting the audience from the main issue by raising an irrelevant point). Just because McDonald’s may have contributed to Americans’ poor health does not mean that football is not harmful—