For the final project we had to analyze the webinar debate between Nicholas Wade and Augustin Fuentes, and decide who would win if we were a judge. If I was judging the debate between these two I would have to choose Fuentes. Fuentes approached the debate with a more straight forward answer arguments and having a strong argument. Fuentes seemed to have more of a clear and conscience understanding of what needed to be discussed about variation of race. I think that one of the most important things with winning a debate is making sure that you are able to answer the opponents argument.
Another thing I liked about Fuentes is I agreed with his points when he said basically that the more separation between certain populations causes differences between those groups of people. He was able to show how important it was to break down his argument and find out the bigger picture behind it. I feel like Wades argument was not as consistent as Fuentes agreements. He made a lot of points that he was not able to defend as well as Fuentes. By saying there was as many subdivisions of races made Wade seem like he had no knowledge about the point that he was making.
One major thing that Fuentes was consistent with doing was responding to all of the arguments that Wade was putting out there. He was able to respond with clarity and actual facts about the topic. While also being able to point out the flaws with in his argument. When an opponent is able to point out what is wrong with somebody else’s knowledge on a topic, it allows the people to point out the flawed credentials of what they are talking about. Wade also had seemed like he manipulated the data so that it could work with in his favor.
I think one flaw with Fuentes argument was the way he approached the debate. it seemed as if he was not in the place to retain new information or be as engaged as he should be. He seemed like he was only concerned with defending the argument that he brought to the debate.
I really appreciate all of the knowledge that I gained from this class. It brought a lot of inside knowledge that I think I needed so that I can understand to look at different situations from different views. Also it taught me not to be one sided to any situation and always be open-minded.