Should we Celebrate Black History Month?

I thank my opponent for engaging in this discussion.

To celebrate something is to publicly recognize it as important and worthy of attention (Webster Dictionary). The question, then, is whether dedicating a month to Black history meaningfully contributes to historical understanding and civic life. I argue that it does for three primary reasons: Black history remains underrepresented in education, understanding it is essential to interpreting present-day institutions, and public recognition expands civic inclusion and aspiration.

Argument 1: Black History Remains Underrepresented

Black history has historically been marginalized within mainstream curricula. Historian Carter G. Woodson, founder of what later became Black History Month, argued in The Mis-Education of the Negro that omission and distortion of Black contributions shaped both national memory and individual self-perception. The month itself originated as a corrective effort in response to this exclusion.

More recently, scholars such as Jarvis Givens in School Clothes document how Black educational efforts and intellectual traditions have often been minimized or framed peripherally in textbooks. Reconstruction-era Black institution-building, independent schooling efforts after emancipation, and intellectual contributions are frequently condensed or omitted.

When a society’s historical narrative systematically underrepresents a group’s contributions, public understanding becomes incomplete. Black History Month functions as a structured intervention within that broader pattern of omission. It does not replace integration; it compensates for persistent gaps.

Argument 2: Understanding the Present Requires Understanding Black History

History is not merely retrospective; it shapes present institutions.

Educational disparities, residential segregation, and funding inequalities did not arise spontaneously. As detailed in The Color of Law, many patterns of housing segregation were reinforced by public policy. Because public schools are largely funded through local property taxes, historic residential segregation continues to influence educational resource distribution.

Similarly, post-emancipation schooling for Black Americans was often severely underfunded and restricted in scope. The cumulative effects of these policies persist across generations.

Without sustained attention to this history, contemporary disparities can appear accidental or cultural rather than institutional. Dedicating time to Black history strengthens civic literacy by clarifying how past policy decisions shape current structures.

Argument 3: Public Recognition Expands Civic Inclusion

Public recognition also carries symbolic and developmental weight. Highlighting figures such as Booker T. Washington, who founded the Tuskegee Institute after being born into slavery, or W. E. B. Du Bois, one of the first African Americans to earn a Ph.D., reinforces a more complete narrative of national achievement.

Representation influences perceived possibilities. When historical narratives include intellectual, political, and institutional contributions from Black Americans, they expand the civic story itself. Celebration in this sense is not uncritical praise; it is public acknowledgment of importance.

References

Berliner, D. C., &Hermanns, C. (2022). Public Education Defending a Cornerstone of American Democracy. Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Givens, J. R. (2023). School clothes: A collective memoir of Black Student Witness. BEACON.

Washington, B. T. (1986). Up from slavery: An autobiography. 1st edition. Penguin.

Webster Dictionary

Rothstein, R. (2018). The color of law: A forgotten history of how our government segregated America. Liveright Publishing Corporation.

Du Bois, W. E. B. (2016). The souls of Black Folk. African American Classic Publications.

To start, I will define the terms my opponent feels are important so we can avoid talking past each other. For clarity, in this debate, I define “should” to mean that the benefits outweigh the harms and that it is morally and socially preferable compared to the alternatives. I define “we” as society at large, including public institutions, schools, and communities. Using these definitions allows us to ground our discussion in real social impact rather than abstract principles.

I will also define “underrepresented” in case the conversation moves in that direction: it means “insufficient presence or acknowledgement of certain groups, often based on gender, race, socioeconomic status, or other demographics, in specific domains or contexts.” Additionally, while my opponent feels that my definition of “celebrate” needs a time limit, in the context of this debate and my dictionary definition, no such limit is needed, because the focus is on the importance and worthiness of the recognition. My opponent’s definition of Black History Month is accepted, as it reflects the universally understood term — except historically, when it was initially celebrated as a single week during Woodson’s time.

Consequently, I will occasionally ask my opponent to define terms I feel are under-addressed, to ensure we remain on the same page and maintain a productive debate.

Rebuttal to Best action Argument

My opponent introduces the principle of “best action” as the evaluative framework for this debate. Because this standard determines how impacts are weighed, it must be clearly defined and justified. Without such clarification, the framework risks functioning as an unsupported assumption rather than a defensible criterion.

As commonly articulated in philosophical literature, the “best action” principle holds that, when multiple courses of action are available, one is morally obligated to select the option that produces the greatest overall good according to a specified standard. In many contexts, this aligns with utilitarian reasoning. However, my opponent does not provide an argument for why this framework should govern the resolution, nor why it should be preferred over alternative ethical approaches.

This omission is significant. Framework selection is not philosophically neutral; it shapes how harms, benefits, and obligations are interpreted. Absent a justification for privileging this standard, it cannot simply be presumed as decisive.

Moreover, even if we provisionally accept a “best action” framework, the Pro position remains consistent with it. Societal institutions do not operate under ideal conditions in which perfect solutions are available. Educational curricula and historical narratives are shaped by long-standing structural patterns, including documented underrepresentation of Black individuals and contributions in mainstream accounts. Where such distortions exist, corrective measures are not merely symbolic — they are proportionate responses aimed at improving epistemic accuracy and civic understanding.

Under a consequentialist interpretation, the persistence of underrepresentation indicates a deficit in current practice. Implementing structured recognition — such as Black History Month — functions as an intervention that mitigates that deficit. In this sense, it plausibly advances the “best action” relative to inaction or continuation of the status quo.

Empirical scholarship further supports this conclusion: exposure to more comprehensive accounts of Black history is associated with increased cross-cultural understanding, greater awareness of institutional development, and improved civic literacy. If the operative standard is maximizing societal benefit, then intentional historical inclusion aligns with that objective.

Rebuttal to claim of personal irrelevance 

My opponent also contends that they do not personally find Black History Month important. However, the resolution concerns what society should do, not what an individual subjectively prioritizes.

Normative public questions are evaluated according to collective impact and social consequences. Individual indifference does not negate broader societal effects. Even if one does not perceive personal relevance, the question remains whether the practice produces measurable or defensible benefits at the societal level.

The historical record and contemporary research indicate that structured recognition of Black history contributes to greater awareness of institutional development, historical inequities, and civic participation. The relevant metric, therefore, is aggregate social impact — not individual preference. On that basis, the Pro position remains substantively supported.

Closing

In closing, the evidentiary and historical foundations of this debate weigh in favor of celebrating Black History Month as a socially beneficial practice. My opponent must not only clarify and defend their philosophical framework, but also demonstrate why it invalidates the documented benefits associated with intentional historical recognition.

Several substantive arguments presented in the Pro case — particularly regarding systemic underrepresentation and institutional literacy — remain insufficiently addressed. Until those points are directly engaged, the balance of impacts continues to favor affirmation of the resolution.

I look forward to continuing this discussion with a focus on clearly articulated standards and evidence-based evaluation.

References

https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/multiculturalism-in-special-education/33681#google_vignette

Pene, M. (2020, October 24). Patriotic Education is a whitewashing of history. UT News.

https://commons.law.famu.edu/famulawreview/vol17/iss1/7

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/calculating-consequences-the-utilitarian-approach/

Woodson, C. G. (2018). The Mis-education of the negro. Youcanprint.

https://rossier.usc.edu/news-insights/news/how-should-black-history-be-taught

Multivariate Research: Design and Interpretation, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Friedman, B. D. (2006). The research tool kit: Putting it all together. Thomson Brooks/Cole.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Frels,R. (2016). Seven steps to a comprehensive literature review. Sage.

Field, A. P. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS. Sage Publications

To begin this round, I want to clarify the scope of this debate. The resolution asks whether society should celebrate Black History Month, meaning this is fundamentally a question about social benefit and harm. The most reasonable evaluation standard is therefore whether the practice produces positive outcomes for society. Demonstrating societal impact is typically done through research and historical evidence, which I have provided throughout this debate.

Rebuttal to the “best action” framework

Throughout the debate, my opponent has asserted a “best action” framework, but has never explained why it should govern this debate. Additionally, my opponent claims that I have accepted this framework, which I have never stated.

This creates several problems. First, without justification there is no reason judges should adopt this philosophical standard. In my earlier response I defined “best action” according to a common philosophical interpretation, but also noted that this is only one philosophical viewpoint among many.

Second, the way my opponent applies this principle leads to unreasonable conclusions. If we must prove that celebrating Black History Month is the single best action among an infinite number of possibilities, then almost nothing could ever be justified. Public policy decisions do not operate under this impossible standard as mentioned Jody Fitzpatrick; instead they evaluate whether a practice produces meaningful benefits.

However, even if we temporarily accept my opponent’s framework, my case still holds. In previous rounds I explained that Black history is often under-taught in U.S. education, in part due to structural limitations in curricula and state-level policy. These structural conditions shape how individuals understand history and social issues. Even under the “best action” framework, celebrating Black History Month is clearly a highly effective and rational choice, because it directly addresses systematic underrepresentation in education while producing demonstrable societal benefits.

Black History Month was originally established by historian Carter G. Woodson in 1926 as “Negro History Week.” Its purpose was to address the systematic exclusion of Black history from mainstream education. The observance therefore functions as a corrective mechanism that promotes historical literacy and recognition of contributions that were historically overlooked. This reinforces my earlier argument that the practice serves an important educational role in society.

Behavioral and social science researchers such as Susan Ambrose point out that people are strongly influenced by how they were taught and what information they are exposed to, and these attitudes often change gradually over time. We can see this pattern historically in areas such as property rights, voting rights, education, and employment opportunities for minority groups. Progress has occurred, but it has often been slow and incremental.

Because laws, policies, and social attitudes influence society in structural ways, targeted educational efforts can play an important role in improving historical understanding. Given the evidence I have presented showing the educational and cultural benefits of Black History Month—and the absence of demonstrated harms—it remains a rational and beneficial action for society to support.

Rebuttal to the “24-hour celebration” argument

My opponent argues that celebrating a month would require constant celebration and therefore prevent sleep. This interpretation relies on an unreasonable literal reading of the resolution.

When people celebrate holidays such as Christmas or Independence Day, they do not celebrate every second of the day. Instead they recognize the occasion through events, education, and reflection Black History Month functions in the same way: it creates a period for increased recognition and discussion, not continuous activity.

Rebuttal to “it doesn’t matter to me”

My opponent again argues that because Black History Month does not matter to him personally, this should carry significant weight. However, public commemorations are not justified by whether one individual finds them meaningful.

Societies recognize historical events and communities because of their collective significance. By my opponent’s logic, any historical commemoration could be rejected simply because one person does not care about it.

When we consider the evidence previously presented—such as the historical underrepresentation of Black history in education—we see that celebrating Black History Month creates a period of recognition that helps address these imbalances. These recognitions have been shown to provide educational and cultural benefits.

Conclusion

My opponent claims that my arguments lack justification. However, in the opening round I provided reasoning and evidence showing that Black History Month produces societal benefits, including addressing historical underrepresentation in education and improving historical literacy.

My opponent has not directly refuted these arguments, meaning they remain standing in the debate. Con has not justified their framework, has not disproven the benefits presented, and has shown no harms resulting from the practice. Since the only substantiated impacts in this debate support the societal benefits of recognizing Black History Month, the resolution should be affirmed.

References

 https://firstliteracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/How-Learning-Works.pdf

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/plessy_v_ferguson_(1896)

https://ed.stanford.edu/news/70-years-after-brown-v-board-education-new-research-shows-rise-school-segregation

Fitzpatrick, J. L., Fitzpatrick, J. L. /Sanders, James R., & Worthen, B. R. (2011). Program evaluation. Pearson Education (US); Pearson. 

Rothstein, R. (2018). The color of law: A forgotten history of how our government segregated America. Liveright Publishing Corporation.

https://nmaahc.si.edu/explore/stories/knowing-past-opens-door-future-continuing-importance-black-history-month

Friedman, B. D. (2006). The research tool kit: Putting it all together. Thomson Brooks/Cole.

I would like to begin this round by thanking my opponent for participating in this discussion. While it is somewhat unusual to do so at this stage of a debate, I appreciate the opportunity to exchange ideas on an important topic. My goal in this debate is not simply to win, but to present substantive arguments that allow the audience to evaluate competing ideas about an important social question.

In this round, I will respond to my opponent’s recent claims while also expanding on arguments presented in earlier rounds.

Response to Claims About Definitions

My opponent argues that I have changed my definitions throughout the debate. However, my definitions have remained consistent. Earlier in the debate I defined “should,” “we,” and “celebrate,” and I accepted my opponent’s widely understood definition of Black History Month. These definitions were provided in order to clarify that the resolution concerns societal outcomes and social impact.

If my opponent believes a specific definition has changed, I would welcome clarification about which definition they believe was altered. Based on the debate record, the definitions have remained consistent throughout the discussion.

My opponent also states that I attempted to define their framework. My intention was not to redefine their framework, but rather to analyze and critique it using philosophical literature. In Round 1 the “best action” framework was introduced but not fully defined or justified. While my opponent provided additional explanation in Round 2, the debate still lacks a clear justification for why this particular ethical framework must govern the resolution.

In contrast, my framework has remained consistent throughout the debate: evaluating the societal benefits and harms of a practice using historical research and social evidence. This is a common approach used in policy analysis and social decision-making. To support this framework, I cited research and historical scholarship demonstrating measurable social effects. Importantly, my opponent has not directly challenged that research or offered competing evidence.

Rebuttal to the “Best Action” Framework

At this stage of the debate, my opponent’s position rests almost entirely on a single claim: that the resolution must be evaluated using a strict “best possible action” framework. However, my opponent has not provided a justification for why this framework must govern the debate. Without that justification, the central foundation of the Con case becomes difficult to sustain.

Throughout the debate I have addressed this framework by referencing philosophical discussions about this form of ethics. Scholars note that applying a strict “best possible action” standard can be extremely difficult in practice because real-world decisions involve numerous competing possibilities and practical constraints.

My opponent suggests that this framework does not require considering a large number of possible actions. However, even in their own examples they compare actions producing vastly different quantities of benefits. This illustrates the practical challenge of determining a single “best” action when evaluating complex social decisions.

To further illustrate the difficulty of applying rigid ethical standards to real-world dilemmas, philosophers often use thought experiments such as the Heinz Dilemma. In this scenario, a man considers stealing medicine he cannot afford in order to save his dying wife. Different ethical frameworks produce different conclusions about how the dilemma should be resolved. I would be interested to hear how my opponent’s “best action” framework would resolve such a scenario when individuals have competing needs and constraints.

Importantly, even if my opponent’s framework were accepted for the sake of argument, they would still need to demonstrate that celebrating Black History Month fails to produce meaningful benefits or that an alternative action clearly produces greater benefits. My opponent has done neither. No harms resulting from Black History Month have been demonstrated, and no alternative action has been presented that would produce greater societal benefits.

Argument: Understanding the Present Requires Understanding Black History

The relevance of this discussion becomes clear when we consider the role of Black history in understanding present social conditions.

Historical scholarship shows that Black families in the United States have faced structural barriers to wealth accumulation and educational opportunity. Policies such as housing discrimination limited home ownership opportunities, which in turn affected long-term asset building. Works such as The Color of Law document how government policy contributed to these outcomes.

Educational disparities also played a significant role. Historically underfunded schools and restricted educational access limited opportunities for many Black Americans. Scholars such as David Berliner, Carl Herman’s, and Jarvis Givens have documented these structural inequalities.

Despite these challenges, many influential figures emerged from these circumstances. Individuals such as Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. Du Bois contributed significantly to educational and political thought while also debating strategies for improving opportunities within Black communities. Recognizing these historical developments helps society understand how present-day institutions and disparities developed.

Research also shows that exposure to Black history can have measurable educational effects. Studies such as Bwanda Albert’s research indicate that increased exposure to Black history can improve historical understanding and increase awareness of social issues. These outcomes demonstrate that the benefits of Black History Month are not merely symbolic but educational.

When we consider that Black history often represents only a small portion of standard curricula in many areas, dedicating time to structured recognition helps address this gap and improves historical literacy and civic understanding.

Importantly, my opponent has not directly refuted these central arguments presented in earlier rounds. The claims regarding underrepresentation in education, the role of historical knowledge in understanding present institutions, and the documented educational benefits of Black history instruction remain uncontested in the debate. Because these arguments were not directly rebutted, they continue to weigh in favor of the Pro position.

Dropped Points

It is also worth noting that some earlier arguments appear to have been dropped in my opponent’s most recent response. In particular, the claim that celebration would require continuous activity and the claim that personal indifference should determine the outcome were not addressed further. Since these arguments were not defended in later rounds, they no longer function as active objections in the debate.

Conclusion

The central question in this debate is whether society should celebrate Black History Month. My position has consistently been that the practice produces meaningful societal benefits by addressing historical underrepresentation, improving historical literacy, and expanding civic understanding.

My opponent has focused primarily on a philosophical framework that has not been fully justified and has not directly engaged with the historical and empirical evidence presented. Even if we temporarily consider the “best action” framework, the evidence presented throughout this debate shows that recognizing Black history produces clear educational and social benefits.

For these reasons, the balance of arguments continues to support the resolution that society should celebrate Black History Month.

Reference 

https://scholarworks.umb.edu/doctoral_dissertations/844/

https://ethicalimagination.lmc.gatech.edu/2022/09/05/the-heinz-dilemma/

Friedman, B. D. (2006). The research tool kit: Putting it all together. Thomson Brooks/Cole.

Rothstein, R. (2018). The color of law: A forgotten history of how our government segregated America

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/calculating-consequences-the-utilitarian-approach/

Du Bois, W. E. B. (2016). The souls of Black Folk. African American Classic Publications

Washington, B. T. (1986). Up from slavery: An autobiography. 1st edition. Penguin.

https://exhibitions.lib.udel.edu/issues-and-debates-in-african-american-literature/home/washington-and-du-bois-the-great-debate/

Berliner, D. C., &Hermanns, C. (2022). Public Education Defending a Cornerstone of American Democracy. Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Givens, J. R. (2023). School clothes: A collective memoir of Black Student Witness. BEACON.

To begin, I want to thank my opponent for participating in this debate. I’ve genuinely enjoyed this discussion, even though we disagree on outcomes and methodology. Our different approaches to truth could be a debate in itself someday, but for now, we are focused on this topic.

Throughout this debate, my opponent has not directly responded to any of my historical evidence, research studies, court cases, or policy examples. Many of my philosophical critiques and dilemmas have also gone unanswered. In debate, when a point is not contested, it stands uncontested. I will address my opponent’s points, though not strictly in order, and will merge related arguments for clarity.

Rebuttal to Definitions

My opponent claims I’ve changed my definitions, but when asked for examples, none were provided. My definitions have remained consistent:

1. “Should” benefits outweigh the harms and that it is morally and socially preferable compared to the alternatives.
2. “We” means society at large, including public institutions
3. “Celebrate” means publicly recognize as important and worthy of attention. This is structured and not a continuous 24/7 activity.
4. Black History Month, which was defined by my opponent and accepted by me. 

These definitions are sufficient to evaluate the resolution and show societal impact.

Rebuttal to “Best Action” / Philosophical Framework

My opponent focused heavily on “best action” and deductive reasoning but has never justified why their framework should govern this debate. While I respect the attempt, my metric — evaluating social outcomes through historical research, data, and policy — is a widely accepted and empirically supported approach to assessing societal impact.

Many of my opponent’s criticisms, such as the “uncertainty principle,” lack of alternatives, and need for numerical measurements, are unjustified. Research inherently compares outcomes across groups and conditions, which addresses alternatives and demonstrates measurable benefits. For example, studies consistently show that exposure to Black history improves understanding of minority issues, empathy, and civic awareness.

Even using my opponent’s framework, the action we can currently take that produces clear benefits is celebrating Black History Month. My opponents main argument for possible harms using this critique is from costs, but that has not been substantiated through research. No harms have been demonstrated, and no alternative action has been shown to produce greater societal impact in this context.

Philosophically, this approach aligns with Aristotle’s emphasis on observation and empirical reasoning. Aristotle argued that understanding outcomes through evidence is essential to making sound decisions. Similarly, my use of historical and social research is a modern application of this philosophical principle, grounding the debate in evidence rather than abstract assumptions.

Rebuttal to Alternative Actions

My opponent lists alternative actions such as charity, stopping wars, or meditation. These do not conflict with celebrating Black History Month. Research shows that education and civic awareness help improve social outcomes, including reducing poverty and increasing sympathy for marginalized groups. Many societal improvements, like civil rights advances, have been driven by educational and policy reform, not by ignoring history. Celebrating Black History Month complements other positive actions, rather than excluding them. 

Rebuttal to Time Frame & Literal Interpretation

My opponent insists on a hyper-literal interpretation, claiming celebrating a month means 24/7 attention. This doesn’t apply to real-world celebrations — for instance, no one celebrates Christmas every second of the day, yet its societal impact is undeniable. Similarly, the time dedicated to Black History Month is sufficient to produce meaningful social benefits.

Rebuttal to Individual Opinion

My opponent again emphasizes their personal indifference. Policy decisions are made at the societal level, considering collective outcomes. While my opponent may not personally feel impacted, research shows that recognizing Black history improves societal knowledge, inclusion, and understanding. As Carter G. Woodson emphasized, failing to understand this history has negative consequences for the community, and educating society benefits everyone.

Conclusion

None of my opponent’s points have directly rebutted my arguments, so they stand uncontested. Black history remains underrepresented; understanding it is crucial for interpreting current social inequities, and public recognition produces measurable societal benefits. Educational and civic outcomes improve when history is accurately taught and celebrated. Recognition of achievements by Black Americans sends a powerful message of possibility and accomplishment that has influenced generations.

In contrast, my opponent has not addressed evidence, justified their framework, or engaged with the critiques I raised. For these reasons, the evidence and reasoning in this debate support the resolution: society should celebrate Black History Month.

References

https://iep.utm.edu/aristotle/

Friedman, B. D. (2006). The research tool kit: Putting it all together. Thomson Brooks/Cole.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Frels,R. (2016). Seven steps to a comprehensive literature review. Sage.

Field, A. P. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS. Sage Publications

Woodson, C. G. (2018). The Mis-education of the negro. Youcanprint.

Berliner, D. C., &Hermanns, C. (2022). Public Education Defending a Cornerstone of American Democracy. Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University.

https://scholarworks.umb.edu/doctoral_dissertations/844/