Skip to content
June 11, 2013 / compassioninpolitics

Topicality and the public square: clearing up misconceptions

What is the context of the defining terms so we can understand each other and be fair kills the public square?

By default we define things–defining things in debate takes those definitions out of default and assumptions and makes them clear. In the same way as shining light on abuses of government.

Plus, policy debates happen for different reasons and in different contexts. The public citizen isn’t one type of individual–but one in different contexts. For instance, the citizens attending public debates in Washington DC are different from public debates in Kansas or middle America or any where else for that matter. Public debates in the debate context are equally unique to a particular brand of audience.

Fair and predictable definitions of limits also serve the purpose of enhancing:
1) Purpose and focus of debate
2) The education, clash, and debate of debate
that ultimately seems to serve the purposes of enlightenment and democracy.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: