Debate
Debate is contention in argument; dispute, controversy; discussion;
especially the discussion of questions of public interestin Parliament or in any
assembly [1]
Debate is a method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a
broader form of argument than deductive reasoning, which only examines whether
a conclusion is a consequence of premises, and factual argument, which only
examines what is or isn't the case, or rhetoric, which is a technique of persuasion.
Though logical consistency, factual accuracy and some degree of emotional appeal
to the audience are important elements of the art of persuasion, in debating, one
side often prevails over the other side by presenting a superior "context" and/or
framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic. The outcome of a
debate depends upon consensus or some formal way of reaching a resolution,
rather than the objective facts as such. In a formal debating contest, there are rules
for participants to discuss and decide on differences, within a framework defining
how they will interact.
Debating is commonly carried out in many assemblies of various types to
discuss matters and to make resolutions about action to be taken, often by a vote.
Deliberative bodies such as parliaments, legislative assemblies, and meetings of all
sorts engage in debates. In particular, in parliamentary democracies a legislature
debates and decides on new laws. Formal debates between candidates for elected
office, such as the leaders debates and the U.S. presidential election debates, are
sometimes held in democracies. Debating is also carried out for educational and
recreational purposes, usually associated with educational establishments. The
major goal of the study of debate as a method or art is to develop the ability to
debate rationally from either position with equal ease.
Although informal debate is common the quality and depth of a debate
improves with knowledge and skill of its participants as debaters. The outcome of
a contest may be decided by audience vote, by judges, or by some combination of
the two.
Debates are a means of encouraging critical thinking, personal expression,
and tolerance of others' opinions. Today, debate still remains essential to
democracy. Debates are conducted in governing assemblies, held in lecture halls
and public arenas, presented in schools and universities, written in newspaper and
magazine columns, heard on radio, or seen on the television. Like our predecessors
in ancient Greece, people argue about what is best for their societies and shape the
course of law, policy, and action.
DEBATE
Easier
A debate is a discussion between
sides with different views. Persons
speak for or against something before
making a decision.
Harder
Two thousand years ago, citizens of
Athens held regularly scheduled
public assemblies. Peoples' votes
determined the policies and actions of
the state.
Citizens decided whether Athens went to war and how it fought. They created the
laws that impacted their daily life. But the votes were always preceded by debates
where citizens and leaders argued about the right choices, what was morally and
legally right, the best way to achieve a desired outcome, and what was possible and
prudent.
Debate teaches cutting-edge research skills. Because the quality of an
argument often depends on the strength of the supporting evidence, debaters
quickly learn to find the best evidence. This means going beyond run-of-the-mill
Internet sources to government hearings, law reviews, professional journal articles,
and book-length treatments of subjects. Debaters learn how to evaluate study
methodology and source credibility.
"Debate is a maneuver where learners are divided onto opposing sides,
generally as teams, to discuss a contentious issue. Learners are afforded the
opportunity to improve their analytic and communication skills by formulating
ideas, defending positions, and critiquing counter positions. Historically, a debate
is a structured activity; however, online media permit a wider range of designs for
online debates, from an inflexibly structured exercise to a process with minimal
structure. When an online debate is more rigid, step-by-step instructions are
provided for debate and defense, as in a formal face-to-face debate. When online
debate is designed with less structure, it operates as an online discussion
concerning a controversial issue."
Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational
argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, which only
examines consistency from axiom, and factual argument, which only examines
what is or isn't the case or rhetoric which is a technique of
persuasion. Though logical consistency, factual accuracy and some degree of
emotional appeal to the audience are important elements of the art of persuasion, in
debating, one side often prevails over the other side by presenting a superior
"context" and/or framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic.
debate
policyde
bate
Proposit
ion
evidence
refutearg
argume Formaldisc
umnt
ussion
ent
Parliame
ntopic
resources
tarydeba
te
Extempo
racontroversy research
neous
Commu
affirmativ
nicaopinion
e
tion
causalcha
backing brainstorm
in
Reason
ing
Precefallacy
dent
evaluation
data
publicspe
forensics
aking
speaker
Lincoln/Dougla
sDebate
issue
presentation
judge
negative
factualclai
valueclaim
m
policyclai
conclusion
m
In a formal debating contest, there are rules for people to discuss and decide
on differences, within a framework defining how they will interact. Informal
debate is a common occurrence, the quality and depth of a debate improves with
knowledge and skill of its participants as debaters. Deliberative bodies such as
parliaments, legislative assemblies, and meetings of all sorts engage in debates.
The outcome of a debate may be decided by audience vote, by judges, or by some
combination of the two. (Of course, this implies that facts are based on consensus,
which is not factual.) Formal debates between candidates for elected office, such as
the leaders debates and the U.S. presidential election debates, are common in
democracies.
The major goal of the study of debate as a method or art is to develop one's
ability to play from either position with equal ease.
Debates are sometime organized for purely competitive purposes,
particularly at the US high-school level, but also in other English-speaking
countries.
Competitive debate is an organized to argue with other teams, competing at
the local, national, and international level[1] It is popular in English-speaking
universities and high schools around the world, most notably in South Africa,
Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and New
Zealand. Many different styles of debate occur under a variety of organizations and
rules.
In schools and colleges, often, it takes the form of a contest with explicit
rules. It may be presided over by one or more judges. Each side seeks to win, by
following the rules, and even by using some rules to break other rules, within
limits. Each side is either in favor ("for, 'Affirmative' "), or opposed to ("against,
'Negative' "), a statement (proposition, moot or Resolution) which if adopted would
change something with the exception allowed to define the scope of the
proposition; i.e. they choose what it will mean if adopted. To further illustrate the
importance of rules, those opposed must destroy these arguments sufficiently to
warrant
not
adopting
the
proposition,
and
are
not
required
to
propose
any
alternative
solutions.
Forms of debate
1. Parliamentary debate
Main article: Parliamentary debate
Parliamentary Debate (sometimes referred to as "parli" in the United States) is
conducted under rules derived from British parliamentary procedure. It features the
competition of individuals in a multi-person setting. It borrows terms such as
"government" and "opposition" from the British parliament (although the term
"proposition" is sometimes used rather than "government" when debating in the
United Kingdom).
2. British Parliamentary Debate
The British Parliamentary debating style involves 4 teams; two "government" or
"proposition" teams support the motion, and two "opposition" teams oppose it. In a
competitive round, the teams are ranked first through fourth with the first place
team receiving 3 points, the second receiving 2, the third receiving 1 and the fourth
place receiving no points. This is the style used by the World University Debating
Championships, or WUDC.
3. Canadian Parliamentary Debate
The Canadian Parliamentary debating style involves one "government" team and
one "opposition" team. In competition, the motion is traditionally "squirrelable".
This means that the assigned motion is not intended to be debated, and may even
be a quote from a film or a song. The government team then "squirrels" the motion
into something debatable by making a series of logical links between the proposed
motion and the one they propose to debate. This makes the debate similar to a
prepared debate for the government team and an impromptu debate for the
opposition team.
4. American Parliamentary Debate
In the United States the American Parliamentary Debate Association is the oldest
national parliamentary debating organization, based on the East Coast and
including all of the Ivy League [citation needed]. The more recently founded
National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA) is now the largest collegiate
sponsor[citation needed].
5. Oxford-Style Debate
Derived from the Oxford Union debating society of Oxford University, "OxfordStyle" debate is a formal, competitive debate format featuring a sharply-framed
motion that is proposed by one side and opposed by another. A winner is declared
in an Oxford-Style debate either by the majority or by which team has swayed
more audience members between the two votes. Oxford Style debates follow a
formal structure which begins with audience members casting a pre-debate vote on
the motion that is either for, against or undecided. Each panelist presents a seven
minute opening statement, after which the moderator takes questions from the
audience with inter-panel challenges. Finally, each panelist delivers a two minute
closing argument, and the audience delivers their second (and final) vote for
comparison against the first.
6. Mace Debate
This style of debate is prominent in Britain at schools level. Two teams of two
debate an affirmative motion (e.g. "This house would give prisoners the right to
vote,") which one team will propose and the other will oppose. Each speaker will
make a seven minute speech in the order; 1st Proposition, 1st Opposition, 2nd
Proposition, 2nd Opposition. After the first minute of each speech, members of the
opposing team may request a 'point of information' (POI). If the speaker accepts
they are permitted to ask a question. POI's are used to pull the speaker up on a
weak point, or to argue against something the speaker has said. However after 6
minutes, no more POI's are permitted. After all four have spoken the debate will be
opened to the floor, in which members of the audience will put questions to the
teams. After the floor debate, one speaker from each team (traditionally the first
speaker), will speak for 4 minutes. In these summary speeches it is typical for the
speaker to answer the questions posed by the floor, answer any questions the
opposition may have put forward, before summarising his or her own key points.
In the Mace format, emphasis is typically on analytical skills, entertainment, style
and strength of argument. The winning team will typically have excelled in all of
these areas.
7. Lets Debate
This style of debate is particularly popular in Ireland at Secondary School level.
Developed in ColáisteIognáid (Galway) over the last ten years, the format has five
speakers: two teams and a single 'sweep speaker' on each side. Speeches last 4:30
minutes with 30 seconds protected from POIs at either end of the debate.
Adjudication will depend on BP marking, but with particular recognition of
principled debating. A ten minute open house will also be adjudicated.
Traditionally, the motion is always opposed in the final vote[citation needed]
8. Public Debate
Main article: Public debate
The International Public Debate Association (IPDA), inaugurated on February 15,
1997 at St. Mary's University (Texas) in San Antonio, Texas, is a national debate
league currently active in the states of Arkansas, Louisiana, Kansas, Alabama,
Texas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Florida, and
Oklahoma. Among universities, IPDA is the fastest growing debate association
within the United States.[citation needed] Although evidence is used, the central
focus of IPDA is to promote a debate format that emphasizes public speaking and
real-world persuasion skills over the predominate use of evidence and speed. To
further this goal, IPDA predominantly uses lay judges in order to encourage an
audience-centered debate style. Furthermore, although the main goal of the debater
is to persuade the judge, IPDA also awards the best speakers within each
tournament.
9. Australasia debate
Main article: Australia-Asia debate
Australasia style debates consist of two teams who debate over an issue, more
commonly called a topic or proposition. The issue, by convention, is presented in
the form of an affirmative statement beginning with "That", for example, "That
cats are better than dogs," or "This House", for example, "This House would
establish a world government." The subject of topics varies from region to region.
Most topics however, are usually region specific to facilitate interest by both the
participants and their audiences.
Each team has three members, each of whom is named according to their team and
speaking position within his/her team. For instance the second speaker of the
affirmative team to speak is called the "Second Affirmative Speaker" or "Second
Proposition Speaker", depending on the terminology used. Each of the speakers'
positions is based around a specific role, the third speaker for example has the
opportunity to make a rebuttal towards the opposing teams argument introducing
new evidence to add to their position. The last speaker is called the "Team
Advisor/Captain". Using this style, the debate is finished with a closing argument
by each of the first speakers from each team and new evidence may not be
introduced. Each of the six speakers (three affirmative and three negative) speak in
succession to each other beginning with the Affirmative Team. The speaking order
is as follows: First Affirmative, First Negative, Second Affirmative, Second
Negative, Third Affirmative, and finally Third Negative.
10. Extemporaneous debate
Extemporaneous debate is a style that involves no planning in advance, and two
teams with a first and second speaker. While a majority of judges will allow
debaters to cite current events and various statistics (of which opponents may
question the credibility) the only research permitted are one or more articles given
to the debaters along with the resolution shortly before the debate. It begins with an
affirmative first-speaker constructive speech, followed by a negative; then an
affirmative and negative second-speaker constructive speech respectively. Each of
these speeches is six minutes in length, and is followed by two minutes of cross
examination. There is then an affirmative and negative first-speaker rebuttal, and a
negative and affirmative second-speaker rebuttal, respectively. These speeches are
each four minutes long. No new points can be brought into the debate during the
rebuttals.