w88 casino News Network (Internship Reporter Guo Yujie)2008Year11month5Sunday 7:30pm, firstThe first round of the Beijing Postgraduate Academic Science, Technology and Culture Festival-College Debate Competition kicked off wonderfully at the Ningyuan Moot Court of w88 casino.This debate competition aims to promote campus culture, show one's own style, inspire thinking and wisdom, and plan for a better future. The first sceneThe opponents are Beijing Jiaotong University and w88 casino. The judging panel is composed of five experts: Zhang Wenxiang, a professor at Minzu University of China, Xiao Wenying, director of the Research and Engineering Department of Beijing Institute of Technology, Song Xiaoxin, director of the Research and Engineering Department of the w88 casino of Material Science and Technology, Shi Gang, a professor at Capital University of Economics and Business, and Zhao Wei, a student of Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications. Yang Changchun, Director of the Graduate Department and Secretary of the Party Branch of w88 casino, Beijing Jiaotong UniversityTong UniversityProfessors Tan Jie, Chen Bo, and Qin Ying also attended this debate as guests.
The debate competition was unprecedentedly grand. Before the competition officially started, the moot court was already surrounded by students from w88 casino and "relatives and friends" who came from Beijing Jiaotong University. As the autumn wind blew the clarion call for a new round of employment and career choices for graduates, the debaters launched a heated discussion around the hot issue of "Which is more important, personal needs or social needs, for graduate students to choose a career?" The positive side, Beijing Jiaotong University, holds the view that personal needs are more important for graduate students to choose a career, while the negative team from w88 casino believes that social needs play a leading role.
Director: Beijing Jiaotong University
Opposition: w88 casino
After the debaters introduced themselves briefly and wonderfully, the debate officially began.Since the debate topic in this competition is full of life colors, the opening argument is not too entangled in the theoretical level.Zhengfang Yi’s argument accurately points out that personal needs dominate career selection because there are many social positions, but whether you can choose a job that suits you completely depends on whether you have an accurate grasp of your personal needs. And the oppositeThe first argument states that choosing a career based on social needs is conducive to the development of individuals and society and can alleviate employment pressure. The speeches made by both parties were clear in logic and concise.
In the attack and defense session, which demonstrated personal reaction ability, both parties switched offense and defense in an orderly manner, trying their best to seize the initiative in the debate. The positive side was aggressive and counter-questioned from the beginning with "I choose my career, not the career that chooses me." The negative side was calm and composed, cleverly avoiding the edge, and overwhelming the positive side with "the training objectives of graduate students clearly stated that they must 'adapt to the needs of society.'" Zhengfang persisted in pursuit and continued to attack: "If society needs graduate students to become whatever they want, they will become whatever they want. Are graduate students like Transformers?" The funny metaphor won applause and laughter from the audience. The two sides had questions and answers, attacks and arguments, and the atmosphere instantly reached a fever pitch.
Compared with the intense attack and defense sessions, the free debate session was even more exciting. The eight debaters' insight and quick response ability were clearly demonstrated in the close combat. Zheng Fang gets straight to the point, pointing out that jobs are arranged by society, but career choice is still a personal decision. The opposition immediately argued: "Individual needs are unstable and varied. If you insist on incorrect personal positioning, it will bring harm to society and individuals." The affirmative side did not show any weakness. Based on the reality of life, they believed that "the purpose of career planning courses offered by universities is to help graduates develop their potential, improve themselves, and position themselves accurately." Both sidesYou advance and I retreat, you come and I go, the tit-for-tat confrontation is full of wisdom and humor. The entire debate was pushed to a climax.
The atmosphere is lively
After some bickering, the burden fell on the fourth debater from both sides. When they concluded their submissions, they stuck to their own arguments, reiterated the weaknesses of the other party, expanded the results of the debate, and enhanced their respective opinions.
The next step is questions from the audience. The audience was very enthusiastic, and the Q&A interaction was as intense as the attack and defense.
Zhang Wenxiang, a professor at Minzu University of China, commented on this debate on behalf of the judging panel. She congratulated all parties for their wonderful performance and said that the debaters' wonderful performance and good language style left a good and deep impression on the judging panel. She believes that regarding what factors dominate graduate students’ career choices, both sides have equal opportunities. She hopes that this debate will enable graduate students to make better choices based on personal needs and social needs in the future career selection process. This is the social value and significance of this proposition. The overall performance is that the positive side has sharp language expression, strong logic, and good coordination; the negative side has a humble attitude, soft yet strong, and makes full use of professional knowledge. However, both sides also made some mistakes, that is, they failed to seize the other party's weaknesses in the debate process and counterattack, making them a powerful weapon in their own debates. Throughout the whole debate, w88 casino's opponent was slightly inferior due to being slightly passive, while the opponent, Beijing Jiaotong University's Toad Palace, won the championship. The best debater was won by the Fourth Debate Department of Beijing Jiaotong University.
The judging panel takes a photo with the contestants
Late8：30, the debate ended successfully.
