Debatezzzzzzzzzzzz

I'm hoping it's just because of the same subjects being discussed over and over again, but sitting through ethics debates was like watching paint dry.

If it was in any other class, I'd probably let it pass, because debates would have just been an excuse to evaluate the oral competency, but a debate in ethics, shouldn't it be a deep and meaningful session of dissing and cussing?

Instead, because of the scoring system (or so it seemed), the debate remained flat and shallow, with all arguments based on "expert" advice and statistics. You know how easy it is to fake a statistic? And you know how difficult it is to actually come up with a statistic that is truly indicative of anything other than that statistics are inaccurate? And these "experts", do you just blindly adopt their point of view because they've got a PhD in smoking pot? Think. Taking a bunch of numbers, arranging them and shitting them out is what a computer does. You're Human. You take information and you put a new spin on it. We could've replaced you with computers, and if a computer could do what you did, that really shows how linear and undeveloped the debate was.

There was no personal opinion, just stats and the opinions of others. It was boring. Debates are supposed to make you think. This one made me facepalm and feel disgusted. Although, I admit, it's a little difficult to emit a personal point of view with the subject of abortion—which proves that we need new subjects.

I really hoped, at least in ethics class, that it would have turned into something a little more deep and meaningful, with concrete examples touching true values and beliefs relating to us, humans. Oh well.