Second encounter with Methodist College

Our second debate (30.05.2009) against Methodist College was an impromptu one, on the topic "THBT pircay is economically desirable".We had to oppose the topic and we managed to secure victory.

The New Logo

Due to the concerns of many that our former logo was unacceptable because the words "debaters' syndicate" were written over the Wesley College crest, we were compelled to design a new logo. This was in a way quite fortunate, as it provided us with a chance to make a meaningful symbol which defines us and signifies what we stand for. Thus a two month long designing process began to create a new logo.....an emblem....a symbol that defined and best explained the Wesley College Debaters’ Syndicate.

Our former logo

So without further a due here is our new logo:

As I mentioned before the new logo is a meaningful one and its meaning is centered on Aristotle’s three arts of argumentation and persuasion: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos.

• The Greek letter Lambda signifies Logos or logic our primary weapon as debaters. Logic involving deductive and inductive reasoning, analysis, the internal consistency of the message--the clarity of the claim, the logic of its reasons, the effectiveness of its supporting evidence, is central and imperative for any good argument, and is thus the primary mode of persuasion. As you may have noticed the letter lambda can be seen to be intertwined with a sword. The sword being the primary weapon of a warrior in most cultures signifies how logos or logic is the Debaters' syndicates’ primary weapon........something we will not go into a debate without.
  

• Aristotle’s second appeal is Ethos (Greek for 'character') or the credibility of a speaker. We tend to believe people whom we respect. One of the central necessities of argumentation is to project an impression to the listener that you are someone worth listening to, in other words making yourself a credible authority on the subject of the debate, as well as someone who is likable and worthy of respect. This is symbolized by the Greek letter Epsilon and is connected to the shield in the center of the emblem. Thus the letter Epsilon and it's connection to the Shield seen at the center of the emblem signifies how the Debaters' Syndicate protects itself and it's arguments with credibility.

• The third technique of rhetoric being Pathos (Greek for 'suffering' or 'experience') is about the emotional appeal of one who is in argument. A good debater appeals to our sense of identity and self interest and exploits common biases; we naturally bend in the direction of what is advantageous to us, what serves our interests or the interests of any group we believe ourselves a part of. This is achieved through the emotional or motivational appeals; vivid language, emotional language and numerous sensory details like stories, humor etc. Thus the numerous methods of practicing pathos is symbolized by the Greek letter Pi and the four Ninja throwing knives (four signifying the numerous methods of practicing pathos).A ninja throwing knife or shuriken is a long distance and deadly secondary weapon which is an essential part of a Ninja’s arsenal either to be used in isolation or in complimenting his primary weapon; the Ninja sword. Thus a parallel could be drawn between a Ninja’s throwing stars and the importance of Pathos for a debater.

· The shaded blue circle is meant to symbolize Wesley College and its double blue colours to which our allegiances lie.

Thus to summarize we debate with logos (logic) as our primary weapon, Pathos (emotional appeal) as our secondary weapon and Ethos (credibility) to shield our arguments. This to us ( the current debating team of Wesley) symbolizes and defines the Wesley College Debaters’ Syndicate’s approach towards debate and argument and our commitment towards furthering and perfecting all three of these areas which are central for the creation and debating of arguments and the presentation of these arguments.

Please comment and give us your input and opinion about our new logo.

Maleen Jayasuriya

President

WCDS

Fall at SBC

I thought I'll not write about our losses,like the Egyptians dont have any records of their defeats.But what the heck! that would be stupid, plus the debate against SBC this week (16.05.09) was just too fun to not write anything about it.We found the impromptu topic kind of tough: "THB that fines should be relative to wealth" which we had to oppose.SBC did an excellent job proposing....the main problem we had was that we found it hard to counter argue their main principle argument which was that rich people arnt dettered by low fines and that it would be unfair on the poor as the poor will be affected more by a fine than a rich person,thus we should make fines proportional .
Looking back I can think of a few arguments we could have made,(my brother just gave me an argument we could have used just now.We could have said we should have a fine that is high enough to detter rich people and poor people alike.....an excessive fine instead of trying to tailormake fines for different economic classes,which is complecated and costs money so...if we had coupled that with what Gehan said then we could have done something).But overall I like how we handled it...we came up with a relatively unorthodox argument and stuck to it throughout.....and we didnt panick when we knew we were going down...which was kind of cool .....I felt that we kept on the pressure throughout
Well all in all I was reminded today that loosing sucks, and that we cant afford to loose again...specially at our next debate with Joes this monday on the topic "THB that China should ratify the post Kyoto protocol".

Maleen

Sisters vs Brothers: DC league debate against Methodist College

Our second League debate was against Methodist College; our sister school.Once again we were on the proposing side, so the debate was hosted by us. The debate took place on the 2nd of May, the topic being "THB the international community should intervene militarily to cease gross human violations" and we managed to secure a victory. According to the judges it was a clear win but we could have increased the margin of victory if we rebutted some of their arguments a bit more.The Metho team did a great job too and brought a few very important arguments, but as the judges put it most of them wernt really developed.All in all it was a good debate......and this is our second debate for the league and our second victory.Our next debate is agaisnt SBC on the 16th and would be our first "away" and impromptu debate for the league.
Maleen