News

The Path to Public Service at SEAS

News

Should Supreme Court Justices Have Term Limits? That ‘Would Be Fine,’ Breyer Says at Harvard IOP Forum

News

Harvard Right to Life Hosts Anti-Abortion Event With Students For Life President

News

Harvard Researchers Debunk Popular Sleep Myths in New Study

News

Journalists Discuss Trump’s Effect on the GOP at Harvard IOP Forum

No Headline

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

The regulations which will govern competition for the debate with Princeton form a third step towards remedying the faults presented at the outset this year by the debating situation at Harvard. The formation of a Sophomore Club and the decision of the Union and Forum to consolidate are two improvements, and this new method of trial also promises to be beneficial.

Taken as a whole it seems better calculated to pick the best men with fairness and accuracy than the old method. Under the system which has heretofore been the general rule, it is extremely hard for the judges to select the best four out of a large number of five minute speakers. Then again a five minute speech in offering little opportunity for rebuttal does not furnish a true criterion of argumentative power. By providing for more than one preliminary trial if the number of contestants is large, the new regulations insure adequate trial to every promising debater, and in the second trial the longer speeches will bring out capabilities in sustained work and rebuttal. The final step in this weeding out process in its character of a regular debate, is calculated to be a sure test both of ability in presentation and rebuttal. On the whole then although the plan may need modification in certain details, it promises to justify itself in furnishing training, in bringing out the different sides of the question, and at last in ensuring the choice of the best men.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags