Instigator / Pro
8
1702
rating
77
debates
70.13%
won
Topic
#2221

Resolved: referenced sources are necessary in a debate

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
6
Better sources
4
2
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
2
2

After 2 votes and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...

Death23
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
12,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
12
1553
rating
24
debates
56.25%
won
Description

Resolved: referenced sources are necessary in a debate. The DebateArt Voting Policy[1] requires sources, and declares three separate purposes of sourcing:

1. To provide impact to each participant’s argument.
2. To either bolster a participant’s argument, or weaken an opponent’s argument.
3. To provide superior results of one debater’s argument over the other.

If sourcing is absent from a debater’s argument, none of these purposes are achieved because the avoidance of sourcing renders an argument to the limited status of personal opinion, or likewise, someone else’s parroted opinion. According to the Voting Policy, cited above, a voter must use the purposes listed above to make adequate judgment about a debater’s sourcing compliance.

Even in a situation wherein a debater proposes a resolution that is currently not commonly-known reality, creative sourcing is possible to reference in support of the resolution. For example, should the resolution, earthling humans have had direct, personal contact with alien beings from another planet, sourcing can be found to creatively demonstrate the resolution, and that sourcing can bolster the argument. It is a condition similar to a fictional vehicle: suspension of disbelief.

Yet, a moderator, in a vote, declared agreement with a debater that sources are not absolutely necessary to use in debate. I am purposefully not providing the link nor the direct quote by a moderator to both protect that moderator and because voting on this debate should not consider outside content, specifically because, according to the Voting Policy, “…reasoning that stems from already-placed votes…” should not be considered for voting. The Pro arguments for this debate will not further reference the commentary referenced above, but will prove by reference to sourcing demonstrating the soundness of the voting policy with regard to sourcing.

Definitions:
Referenced sources: citations from scholarly sources which either bolster a debater’s argument, or weakens an opponent’s argument. Full citation, either by providing the complete IRL, allowing a reader to access the cited website, or providing sufficient publication information to find the specified source [author, publication title, publisher, date of publication] by manual [offline] means.

Necessary: [OED], Indispensable, vital, essential, requisite

Debate: Specifically, for purposes of this debate, all debates engaged via DebateArt.com

Debate Protocol

R1 – R3: Argument, rebuttal, defense
R4: No new argument; rebuttal, defense, conclusion

Shared BoP: Pro: referenced sourcing is necessary in debate. Con: referenced sourcing is not necessary in debate.

[1] https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

RFD in comments

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

See comment section:
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2221/comment-links/29158