So I have received constant emails requesting books and information on the NCFL National Tournament LD topic.  There seems to be no books available on the topic and coaches seem to be wanting a clear analysis of the resolution.  This is intended to be a quick presentation of four Affirmative and three Negative arguments that could be used on the topic.  The arguments are logically in line with what you would find in LD Champs, with the exception that LD Champs provides much more of an introduction into the topic including, but not limited to: Introductions to the topic, definitions, values, value criterion, and evidence that coincides with the arguments made.  This briefing will contain no evidence, just analysis.  Additionally, this topic is more like a Public Forum resolution, so there is a limited amount of ground that can be covered, so the arguments will at times sound repetitive.  I have also attempted to keep the arguments light, so that students can tailor them to their own cases and needs.  I would encourage you all to check out a free edition of LD Champs in the webstore, so you can see if LD Champs would be good for your team.      

AFFIRMATIVE

1. 1)   The fine arts should be valued over athletics, but both ought to be valued. 
   

        The fine arts must be valued above athletics by the secondary education system, but this does not mean that we cannot place value on athletics.  The fine arts and athletics are not diametrically opposite or mutually exclusive.  However, when we look at the realistic budgetary restraints of America and the tough choices legislators have to make, it is critical that the most beneficial program be valued higher. 

        What needs to be understood is that the fine arts does not exclude athletic activity.  For example, the fine arts would include dance, ballet, performance art, and many other activities that require extreme athleticism.  It becomes quit difficult to think of an athletic activity, other than those mentioned that overlap with the fine arts.  You would never see a basketball player also playing a violin while dribbling down the basketball court.  In essence, what is being argued is that you get more bang for your buck when you value the fine arts over athletics in the American secondary education system. 

        Siding with the Affirmative does not mean that athletics has no value.  In fact, let me be the first to say that athletics is a great way to keep your body in shape, learn team work, and structural rules.  Ironically, these same lessons can be learned in the very room I am debating in.  Okay, keeping my body in shape may not be something that is focussed on in high school forensics, but clearly you can learn team work and structure through the fine arts.  This is not to say that physical health is not important, but not all high school athletic programs focus on physical fitness.  In fact, if you attend a high school football game you will notice that the offensive and defensive linemen are bordering on 300 pounds and their diets are not focused on health, but on girth. 

        What is tragic is that we are forced to debate this topic.  The reality is that both the fine arts and athletics have value, but clearly the fine arts should be valued over athletics in secondary education because fine arts can achieve the same goals and skills developed by athletics, but athletics can not claim the same.  

2. 2)   The fine arts focus is more educational than athletics.
   

        Fine arts is more educational as it requires more mental faculties.  This does not mean that athletics does not require intelligence and thinking, but when compared to the fine arts, there is no comparison.  Music, dance, debate, theater, and art develop many educational skills that athletics cannot match.  For example, an art class can help teach a student history, mathematics, and science.  Art can teach a student the history and the culture of people.  In fact, we learn about most cultures through their art music and language.  We rarely define a societies history by the athletic activities that they participated in.  You can learn mathematics through art.  Geometry is the cornerstone of art.  You must master measurements, volume, and circumference to truly learn about art.  Art also teaches students about science.  Some of the greatest artists had to master biology and form in order to create their masterpieces.  Examples would be DiVinci and Michelangelo.

        I know what you are thinking.  The Negative debater can think of examples of how athletics provides for this kind of education, but when you think about all of the activities that fall under the fine arts, there is no doubt that fine arts is paramount.  You can learn every aspects of every subject that our educational system values from the fine arts.  You can learn English through Forensics’, history through art and drama, mathematics through music and art, and science through art and performance dance.  Athletics can not make this claim.

        If you are still skeptical, think about the private educational system in America.  You never see a student go to a school that has its primary emphasis on athletics.  However, there are many schools in America that focus on art, music, and drama.  The reason is that these subjects overlap with core subjects studied and valued by colleges.  Athletics should be a part of any well rounded education, but if we are asked to weigh athletics and the fine arts, it is more than clear that the fine arts provides much more to a student than athletics. 

      

3. 3)   Athletics is unfairly being adjudged by this resolution.
   

        This may be an awkward argument to hear from an Affirmative debater, but I believe that the fine arts should be valued above athletics, not because athletics isn’t extremely valuable, but because athletics is not necessary for educational development.  Physical education about the body and health is necessary, but organized athletics is not necessary in the American secondary educational system.  The topic itself is flawed and the Affirmative should be provided the ballot because clearly fine art is essential to understanding history, mathematics, English and science.  Could you imagine a History book without artwork?  What about an English class without Shakespeare.  Okay, I know some dislike Shakespeare, but imagine English class without poetry.  How about a geometry book without M.C. Esher.  The reality is that the fine arts is necessary to educate students.  It can even be an expansive asset.  Forensics teaches students to write, read, and articulate their thoughts.  Performance dance and ballet teach students about biology and physical fitness as well as control of one’s body.  These are essential lessons learned through the fine arts.

        Athletics, while enjoyable and beneficial to those who participate, it is not essential to educate students about physical fitness.  Traditional P.E. cannot be categorized as Athletics.  P.E. is education about the body and physical fitness, but is not necessary an athletic course.  The Negative may try to frame the debate to include physical education under the guise of secondary athletics, but don’t be fooled.  Athletics is something different.  Athletics is organized physical competition.  If the framers wanted us to debate physical education versus the fine arts, they would have provided for it in the resolution.  Instead, the framers would like us to debate between the fine arts and what can only be seen as competitive or intramural athletics.  Both forms of athletics involves physical fitness, but not necessarily any education into one’s body or fitness itself. 

        The fine arts is essential to learning, while athletics is valuable as an extracurricular activity, but not necessary for educational development.  A student can gain knowledge of fitness through physical education or possibly ballet or dance from the fine arts.      

4. 4)   America must value what provides for the most prosperity after secondary education.
   

        It is essential that we cut through the drama “no pun intended” of this resolution.  The reality is that the fine arts lead students to achieve bigger and better things at a higher rate than secondary athletics.  There is no doubt that a few students will turn out to be the next Lebron James or Anna Kournikova, but the majority of students will turn out to be Josh Jones or Christina Stewart.  Now you may be wondering who the later two individuals are.  The answer is that they are your doctors, dentists, teachers, and legislators.  Athletics is educationally comparable to a lottery ticket.  You get a limited time to benefit from the purchase, but the chances of cashing in is very low.  You get to possibly exercise your body, but the chances of an individual becoming a paid athlete is minimal.  You can learn some lessons from athletics, but nothing comparable to the fine arts. 

        People are daily employed because of their participation and passion that evolved from the fine arts.  Here are a few examples: the lawyer who did forensics, the musician who became a math teacher, the dancer who became a P.E. teacher, the sculptor who became a doctor.  Statistically, individuals who participate in athletics and fine arts in secondary education benefit as they grow older, but when you compare the two, it is clear that those who only participated in fine arts advance higher in society than those who only participated in athletics. 

        I would encourage participation in both activities, but if you are gambling on which resource we should invest dollars into, it is clear that the fine arts is the better investment.  Again, athletics is like buying a lottery ticket and the fine arts is more comparable to buying an insured CD.  

NEGATIVE  

COMING SOON!

1)    Neither the fine arts or athletics should be adjudged by the resolution.

2)    The fine arts and athletics are not mutually exclusive.

3)    Both the fine arts and athletics should be equally valued in American secondary education.