Sideways Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 3 hours ago, Bobby L. Collins said: Eristic From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In philosophy and rhetoric, eristic (from Eris, the ancient Greek goddess of chaos, strife, and discord) refers to argument that aims to successfully dispute another's argument, rather than searching for truth. According to T.H. Irwin, "It is characteristic of the eristic to think of some arguments as a way of defeating the other side, by showing that an opponent must assent to the negation of what he initially took himself to believe."[1]Eristic is arguing for the sake of conflict, as opposed to resolving conflict.[2] Use in education Eristic was a type of "question-and-answer"[3] teaching method popularized by the Sophists, such as Euthydemos and Dionysodoros. Students learned eristic arguments to "refute their opponent, no matter whether he [said] yes or no in answer to their initial question".[4] Plato contrasted this type of argument with dialectic and other more reasonable and logical methods (e.g., at Republic 454a). In the dialogue Euthydemus, Plato satirizes eristic. It is more than persuasion, and it is more than discourse. It is a combination that wins an argument without regard to truth. Plato believed that the eristic style "did not constitute a method of argument" because to argue eristically is to consciously use fallacious arguments, which therefore weakens one's position.[5] Unlike Plato, Isocrates (often considered a Sophist) did not distinguish eristic from dialectic.[6] He held that both lacked a "'useful application' ... that created responsible citizens",[7] which unscrupulous teachers used for "enriching themselves at the expense of the youth."[8] Philosophical eristic Schopenhauer considers that only logic pursues truth. For him, dialectic, sophistry and eristic have no objective truth in view, but only the appearance of it, and pay no regard to truth itself because it aims at victory. He names these three last methods as "eristic dialectic (contentious argument)."[9] According to Schopenhauer, Eristic Dialectic is mainly concerned to tabulate and analyze dishonest stratagems,[10] so that they may at once be recognized and defeated, in order to continue with a productive dialectic debate. It is for this very reason that Eristic Dialectic must admittedly take victory, and not objective truth, for its selfish aim and purpose. Toss a golden apple labeled "to the most creative" into the room when DCI has their winter meetings and let them sort that out by themselves....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 4 hours ago, ContraFart said: You make some good points. The only difference is that all of these other subjective activities have objective elements that are common among all the competitors. DCI does not. DCI uses the same ingredients, but there is no standard for any element. So DCI is 100% subjective while other subjective activities are maybe 50% subjective 50% objective. This, along with the fact that the rubrics and priorities of that 100% subjective judging change every other year, results in the lay person not knowing why the scores are what they are. 2015 and 2016 the top 3 corps were separated by less than a point. Can the average fan in plain language explain why Bluecoats did not win in 2015 and Crown didn't win in 2016? I don't think so. So when you say variances are allowed and no big deal, it makes no sense to me. For the dog judging, the goal is to meet objective standards of what makes that breed what it is. They are striving for uniformity to the manual of standards for that dog. Judging a marching/music ensemble show is pretty much the opposite. The judges try and rank and rate the units (as always) that are doing widely disparate shows against the definitions of each caption/subcaption. Yes, it is totally subjective, but as long as a judge can logically defend his/her opinion, it is what it is. The only 'objective' elements of judging today would be the timing penalties...you either performed within the allotted time or you didn't. Back in VFW days, you had the Cadence caption that is also an objective (and silly in today's eyes) caption. Even Inspection was primarily subjective, in that "wear and tear" was not ticked, and deciding if something was a tick or wear and tear was a subjective decision (based in part how glib the DM was in explaining that loose thread). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpbobcat Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 After reading through all of the posts on this thread i have a a couple of questions and a comment: The questions: 1.Is there some way to see the "resumes" of DCI's judges ? 2.Is there any place to see what DCI's requirements are to be a judge ? 3.Is there any place to see what DCI's training/testing of judges consists of. Comments: 1.I'm an engineer and land surveyor. I had obtain several years of acceptable experience,then take licensing exams to practice. I don't know if DCI actually has a "test" for judges. My suggestion,have a several judges do "sheets" for the same show, If they are properly trained,and "objective",their sheets should all be about the same for each corps. 2.I keep hearing about people becoming judges. Other then people in education,or possibly retirees, I don't know many people,including myself, who could work their full time job and judge contests all summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 (edited) To whom (not Contra, not Cappy, not DeusEx, not Gar, not Mike, ...) it concerns: Quoting shorter portions of someone's post, and/or highlighting passages to focus in on a point is fine. Sometimes in the name of humor or parody doing a 'fixed that for you' edit of someone else's post is funny. Healthy debate on contextual meanings of various quotes is also par for the course. But when someone completely fabricates another poster's quote for nothing more than to get a rise or further their own agenda, that is both cheap and gutteral. So please be aware of that as we continue to engage; not only in this thread but also in others. Pretty sure that one or two will likely bring out the flame-throwers here, but that is fine with me. Edited August 23, 2017 by Stu 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 5 hours ago, garfield said: Really? I had no idea. Wow, stay on for 8 seconds and look better doing it than the next rider may let you win on style points? And the style points were maxed out by you when we saw you attempting to milk the bull not the cow!!! Just sayin' 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barigirl78 Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 17 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: i dont really care. Not like i have any skin in the game Did you feel the way last year when they decided not to release recaps? We have no skin in the game, why do we need to see them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 2 hours ago, MikeD said: For the dog judging, the goal is to meet objective standards of what makes that breed what it is. They are striving for uniformity to the manual of standards for that dog. Judging a marching/music ensemble show is pretty much the opposite. The judges try and rank and rate the units (as always) that are doing widely disparate shows against the definitions of each caption/subcaption. Yes, it is totally subjective, but as long as a judge can logically defend his/her opinion, it is what it is. The only 'objective' elements of judging today would be the timing penalties...you either performed within the allotted time or you didn't. Back in VFW days, you had the Cadence caption that is also an objective (and silly in today's eyes) caption. Even Inspection was primarily subjective, in that "wear and tear" was not ticked, and deciding if something was a tick or wear and tear was a subjective decision (based in part how glib the DM was in explaining that loose thread). Most people conflate the aspects of criteria and observational evaluation. Math is something in which both aspects are objective. Dog Shows and DCI are activities where the criteria may be objective, but the application of observational evaluation based on that criteria will always be subjective. The more education the judge receives on criteria interpretation, education on how and what to observe, education on how to set aside personal bias, the less percentage variation will occur within the evaluation. However, the evaluation will still be subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 2 hours ago, rpbobcat said: 3.Is there any place to see what DCI's training/testing of judges consists of. Maybe they begin in the minor leagues. OC corps and HS bands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ContraFart Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 19 minutes ago, Stu said: Most people conflate the aspects of criteria and observational evaluation. Math is something in which both aspects are objective. Dog Shows and DCI are activities where the criteria may be objective, but the application of observational evaluation based on that criteria will always be subjective. The more education the judge receives on criteria interpretation, education on how and what to observe, education on how to set aside personal bias, the less percentage variation will occur within the evaluation. However, the evaluation will still be subjective. But my argument is that there is far less objective criteria in DCI than in any other subjective scoring sport. There is no perfect model to compare a drum corps show to, in other sports there are textbook definitions of how things are supposed to be done. A triple axle is a triple axle, there is an objective definition. A trained eye can better assess the launch angle, the rotation speed, the foot position, etc, but the naked eye of a layman can at least know it was a triple axle or a triple lutz and know that its a required part of their show. Drum corps fans cannot agree on difficulty content or physical visual demand. For example BD and Crown use almost fundamentally different brass techniques. There is a different sound, a different balance, a different clarity of tone, different technical aspects and neither one is right or wrong, its a matter of preference. This is why I say the difference between the top corps is only a matter of degrees. Where on the sheets will it definitively say that Crowns Brass was better than BDs? I think there can be reasonable cited arguments that can defend either. This is why I keep going back to the fact the the judge assigned to the caption is more important than the performance on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ContraFart Posted August 23, 2017 Share Posted August 23, 2017 3 hours ago, Cappybara said: Not at all. But the huge difference between your evaluation of that show and the judge's evaluation of that show invalidates your opinion on Crown 2009 for me personally. It gives off a warning sign that there's something really off when your assessment is not even in the same ballpark as the rest of the DCI judges Every once in a while there is art that moves people in a way that its imperfections are dismissed. 2009 Crown is that show for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts