An article for the school magazine about a debate

2
0



Virtue House and Intellect House met in the final of the first Inter-house English Debate Competition of Carmel Secondary School yesterday. They tackled the motion “That school days are the best days of our lives”. Virtue House was the affirmative side and Intellect House took the negative stance.

The debate took place on November 19, with Mrs. Shek Yung Lai Fan and Mrs. Kan Lam Wai Yi, two English teachers from our school, as adjudicators.

Virtue House argued that students do not need to face fierce competitions as the adults do in society when they are in school days and this helps them build good relationship with others. After leaving school, people need to face numerous and various keen competitions, especially those in the workplace where people compete against each other for power, job promotion and high wages. However, in school days, students just need to work hard for their exams.

“In school days, people don’t view schoolmates as enemies, and don’t need to worry whether their friends are going to betray them. In other words, school days are the only period in which people can enjoy true harmony and friendship. Isn’t this the best time of our lives?” said Form Four student Chan Tai Man, the first speaker for the affirmative side.

Intellect House admitted that the best friendship in lives usually exist in schooldays. But they pointed out that schooldays is boring: “Due to their economic ability, or young age, students cannot enjoy the wonderful life in our city. For example, they cannot go to bars and chat with friends while drinking alcohol after school,” said Form Five student Chan Siu Man, the first speaker for the negative side.

Both sides compared the freedom that people can enjoy in school days with that in other stages of life.

The negative side pointed out that youngsters are under control of adults in school days. For example, they cannot go out for a whole night as they may be scolded by parents. Therefore, people cannot enjoy the lifestyle that they favour.

The affirmative, on the other hand, said people in school days usually bear fewer responsibilities in aspects like families, and workload, “Without these restrictions against their freedom, people have more free time. We can say that they are physically and emotionally free.” said Form Five student Wong Ha Ha, the third speaker for Virtue House.

Both adjudicators were impressed by the creative ideas given by both teams. In the end, they gave the edge to Intellect House because Virtue House provided inadequate examples to support their points. “I think the presentation of the affirmative team was great. Their third speaker Wong Ha Ha succeeded in rebutting the other side and she spoke fluent English. If not for giving limited supporting evidence and examples, they could have performed even better,” said Mrs. Kan.

Intellect House’s strategy won praise. “The negative got a clear team line, strong evidence and concrete examples. Good job!” Mrs. Kan concluded.

The Debate is held by the English Society of the school.