w88 casino News Network (Reporter Zhang Fengye)11month12日夜7Point,The third "East Asia International Cup" w88 casino Debate Competition continues to be wonderful. The topic of the debate in this competition is "Does human flesh search have more advantages than disadvantages or does the disadvantages outweigh the advantages?" The positive side, the w88 casino of Information, believes that "the advantages of human flesh search outweigh the disadvantages," while the opposing side, the w88 casino of Public Administration, holds the view that "human flesh searches have more disadvantages than advantages." Teachers Bao Lu, Zhou Yumei and Wang Zhimin served as judges for this competition. The competition deeply discussed a prominent issue existing in today's society, triggering in-depth thinking among the debaters on both sides and the students in the audience.
Teachers Wang Zhimin, Zhou Yumei, and Bao Lu serve as judges for this competition
The audience listened carefully
In the "Opening Statement" session,First of all, Qu Yaxing, the first defender, stated his point of view: "The advantages of human flesh search outweigh the disadvantages." Qu Yaxing defines "human flesh search" as making full use of the power of others to improve the efficiency of problem solving, which is different from traditional mechanical search methods. She mentioned that human flesh search has fully improved the speed of information dissemination and exchange, as well as the utilization rate of information, and has played an important role in exposing corruption and finding relatives. At the same time, she said that the party she represents will conduct a profound analysis of "the idea that the advantages of human flesh search outweigh the disadvantages" from both the fact and value levels.
Qu Yaxing makes the opening statement
Subsequently, the opposing side, Xie Jing, made a clear statement on his point of view: “Human flesh search does more harm than good”. Xie Jing's definition of human flesh search is "the use of modern technology to transform traditional mechanical search into a search method of people looking for people and people searching for people." She said that the opposition acknowledges the two sides of the matter, but while recognizing the benefits of human flesh search, they have to emphasize the huge negative impact and heavy cost of human flesh search. At the same time, they proposed that the pros and cons of things should be judged within a certain time and space, as well as the impact on society and people.
Xie Jing, the opposing side, makes an opening statement
The subsequent attack and defense sessions fully demonstrated the style of the second and third debaters on both sides, pushing the entire debate to a climax. In the first round of attack and counter-argument, Li Chenxi, the second defender of the affirmative, first challenged Wang Jinghan, the second defender of the negative side. The two sides had a heated exchange on the topic of "what is human flesh search" and how to judge the pros and cons of human flesh search. The second argument of the affirmative took the incident of netizens collecting answers to questions from other netizens through Baidu and other online media as an example, and proposed that human flesh search and knowledge search, which benefit the general public, have more advantages than disadvantages. The second argument is that what is good for most people is not necessarily right.
Li Chenxi, the second defender of the affirmative, asked the negative side
During the second round of counterattack and defense, the second defense side asked the positive side where the human flesh search was beneficial to morality, legality, and human rights. The two sides then launched a heated debate on related issues.
Wang Jinghan, the second debater of the opposing side, answers the question from the opponent’s debater
In the subsequent confrontation between the three arguments for the affirmative and the three arguments against, the two sides launched their own discussions on issues such as privacy rights and whether the number of beneficiaries can be used as a criterion for judging the pros and cons.
The affirmative side makes three arguments and Chen Yi asks the negative side
The opposing side’s three debaters Yao Lei listened carefully to the other side’s debaters’ questions
Zhou Sa, the fourth debater of the positive side, makes a concluding speech
Liu Feifei makes a concluding statement in the fourth argument of the opposition
Afterwards, the most exciting event ushered in "Free Debate" Link.First of all, the affirmative side refuted the opinion put forward by the negative side that "human flesh search is illegal". There was a heated debate on whether this view was correct or not. Subsequently, the focus of the debate shifted to the standard for judging the pros and cons of human flesh search. Both parties cited various examples regarding the depth and breadth of the impact of human flesh searches, involving hot issues and well-known events in current society. short14Minutes brought the audience a pleasant audio-visual feast. The debaters from both sides showed their talents, which fully demonstrated the profound thinking of contemporary college students on social issues.
Students present expressed their opinions
After the competition, Wang Zhimin, a teacher from the w88 casino of Humanities, commented on the entire debate. He pointed out several shortcomings of both sides during the debate. For example, it did not draw a clear conclusion on the definition of "human flesh search"; it did not grasp the weaknesses in the other party's argument; it did not elaborate on a certain entry point, etc.
Teacher of w88 casino of HumanitiesWang Zhimin comments on the game
Photograph of debaters from both sides with the judges
In the end, the Information College of the affirmative side won, and Wang Jinghan, the second debater of the negative side, won the title of "Best Debater".
