The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the debate by Alan Keyes and Alan Dershowitz on the role of religion in the modern American society. The essay summarizes each debater’s arguments and thereafter gives an analysis of the debater’s presentations.

Summary of Keye’s Ideas

According to Alan Keyes, the modern society is characterized by great advances and discoveries in technology and science. Keyes argues that, as time goes by, man continues to discover new knowledge that may be destructive if, not protected by the right principles of morality. In this regard, Keyes sees religion as an important aspect of human life, which is ended to safeguard the morals of the people. Keyes observes that religion instills a sense of responsibility and that all people regard one another as equals. He says thus: “…in that way, I believe, the question of the relevance of religion and faith presents itself in our time.” By these words, Keyes emphasizes his main idea that; the greatest role of religion in the modern society is the promotion of moral judgment and a sense of responsibility. Keyes supports his arguments by alluding to the need for the people to be morally responsible so as to handle dangerous knowledge well. The assumption behind his thought is that morals can be upheld through religion.

Summary of Dershowitz Remarks

Dershowitz disagrees with Keyes regarding the relationship between religion and morality. He argues thus: “morality can be maintained without religion, and indeed it must be maintained without religion because there are always be people who are not religious. Dershowitz observes that religion causes division because it portrays some sections as being better than others in the pretext of worshiping the true God. Indeed, Dershowitz sees that religion is dangerous for the current times. He supports his argument by giving examples from the Bible, where it contradicts about the equality of people. He argues that the Christians claim that people are equal, yet the Bible regards a woman as a lesser being. He also wonders how responsibility can promote morality where some advocate for mass killings in the pretext of pleasing God. He assumes that one does not need religion in order to behave morally.

Analysis of the Debate

Dershowitz disagrees completely with Keyes regarding the need for religion in order to practice morals. While Keyes sees religion as being important for proper moral judgment, Dershowitz provides several ideas to disprove a Keyes’ argument.

Overall, Dershowitzopposer’s ideas. Unlike Keyes, Dershowitz provided real-life examples to support his arguments. He also read and quoted from other authors in support of his arguments. Indeed, he considered all religions while arguing his points, unlike Keyes, who seemed more inclined to his religion. Dershowitz is more convincing and has applied the aspects of ethos, pathos, and logos on his presentation. His oratorial, convincing power came out very well as he applied both verbal and nonverbal cues. Keyes, however, majored on a single idea throughout his presentation. Even though the two presentations make sense, Dershowitz’s presentation seems more effective than Keyes’.

Conclusion

In sum, both speakers applied some elements of presentation skills. However, Dershowitz’s presentation is more effective and seems to make more sense. Unlike Keyes, Dershowitz applied strong presentation skills, was organized well, and supported his ideas with evidence.

Reference

Belzer no. (2012, May 21). Alan DershowitzVs. Alan Keyes debate over religious role in America, 9-27-2000, C-Span. Retrieved from Youtube<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5NkdKw2txw>