DAY 2:

INTRODUCTION TO ARGUMENT:
1) ARGUMENT STRUCTURE (A.R.E.L)
Arguments are delivered in the structure of A.R.E.L, which stands for:

Assertion : state your claim. Your statement of why you support/oppose the
motion.

Reasoning : logically explain why your claim is true. The because of your
statement.
Evidence : give supporting data to strengthen your reasoning.

Link-back : the conclusion of your whole explanation, which is how your

arguments prove the motion true/false.
Example 1:
The motion is about beauty pageants. You are the negative team. One of your arguments
says that Miss Universe kind of contests should be opposed because it degrades woman.
Arrange this randomized order speech into the correct order of A.R.E.L
structure!
It puts a woman in a position as an object and to be valued based on their
1) Assertion
appearance. Furthermore, the contest is aimed to be a commercial

2) Reasoning

business, thus the contestants are positioned to be a commodity.

Since it becomes an arena of women objectification as well as a business

3) Evidence/exa

commodity, thus the contest degrades women.

Miss Universe contest degrades women.

mple
4) Link back

The adjudication process are 80% based on beauty skill while the brain
session is only additional and the questions can be answered by
elementary school students, like what will you do if you are a president?
While during the contest season, the event organizer open up many
gamble sites to bet on who is going to win and gain more than 2 billions
US$ dollar in 2006 only.

Example 2:
The motion is about quota for women in the parliament. You are the negative team. You
want to say that quota would only strengthen the paradigm in society that women have
less capability than men, and undermines them in the end.
Arrange this randomized order speech into the correct order of A.R.E.L
structure!
Nowadays there is still a strong stigma in society believing that women are
1) Assertion
inferior to men and has less capability than men. Reserved seats in the
parliament will only strengthen the paradigm that women can only sit in
the parliament if they are facilitated but not because they can equally
compete with men. Thus justifying the wrong perception that women could

2) Reasoning
3) Evidence/exa
mple

not reach the same level as men unless given privilege.

Quota will only strengthen the stigma in society that undermines women.
Thus, quota for women in parliament will only strengthen the negative
perception that undermines women, hindering the promotion of women
being equal to men.
3

4) Link back

In Uganda, public opinion that does not go in favor of women increased

rapidly after the implementation of this kind of quota (this was also
supported by some polling).

2) TYPES OF ARGUMENT (the deeper structure of reasoning)

Types of argument:
1. Justification Argument
2. Effectiveness Argument
3. Implication Argument
4. Hybrid Argument
1. JUSTIFICATION ARGUMENTS
are arguments where we put certain assertions or goals to the test of principles in
judgmental manner.
This requires knowledge on principles related to the motion as well as its origin for better
understanding
and delivery.
Examples:
a. Rights to live is a right which no one may limit
b. Individual rights to the extent of privacy may be breached for collective rights of
security
Justification argument answers the question is it the right thing to do?. It basically
answers the question of right or wrong, whether something is appropriate or not, in the
perspective which the debate uses as a standard.
The instruments or sub-hypothesises used to prove this justification argument would be:
1)underlying principle, 2)argument object, and 3)link.
1. Underlying Principle:
an elaboration of principle used as a basis of judgement, (directed in such way so
it tends to the argument object, although the object is not discussed yet)
2. Argument object:
Characterizing the arguments object
3. Link:
Then to link the object of argument to the aforementioned principle
Examples:
a. Argument: Rights to live is a right which no one may limit
Underlying Principle
What are the basis for a state (the authority) to limit rights, what are the
fundamental distinction between derogable and non-derogable rights?
Argument object
Characterization of the rights to live
Link
Why does the rights to live fall within the criteria of non-derogable rights?
(Similar examples to right limitation motions: mutant custody/superheroes de-power/free
pokemon/taking
away transformers personal liberty/restrict make fun of religions on 9gag )

b. Argument: Pornography is consistent with feminism ideology

Underlying Principle
What is the basic principles held by feminism?
4

Argument object
Characterization of pornography
Link
That the characters of pornography is not contradictory to the principles of
feminism, hence is consistent
(Similar examples to a is consistent with b or not motions: aurors are allowed to use
unforgiveable curse/jedi use
mind trick in the course of justice )

2. EFFECTIVENESS ARGUMENTS
are arguments in which we claim one thing as the proper solution to the problem
identified from the motion. It is essential to characterize both the problem, and areas
which the solution would affect. In the reasoning, we need to explain what the problem
requires to be solved, why our solution fulfills those requirements, compare our claimedsolution to the system running in status quo and/or other alternative solutions currently
available (including the opponents, if any), and imply that our solution is the most
appropriate.
Examples:
a. Death penalty will help deter crime rate
b. Intercepting emails will provide better source to hunt terrorists

Problem Characterization
The nature and causes of the problem, or the thing which the solution wishes to
change (directed in such way so it tends to the solution offering, although it is not
discussed yet)
Solution Offering
in which areas will the solution work
Conclusion
The solution solves the problem

Example:
a. Argument: Death penalty will help deter crime rate
Problem characterization
What are the factors of a person committing crime, and how big a risk must be to
deter them from doing so?
Solution offering
Death penalty deters future criminals, as it is an ultimate risk outweighing almost
anything
Conclusion
Death penalty would help deter crime
(Similar examples to death penalty, effective or not motions: Naruto should let Sasuke to
be given death
penalty/Death eaters should be killed (given death penalty) in the spot by aurors using
unforgiveable curse (and
ignores the process of law enforcement in the court of justice of the Ministry of Magic )

b. Argument: Lifting fuel subsidies will not deter people from consuming fuel
Problem identification
Consumption of fuel is an inelastic necessity. Inelastic necessity is not affected by
price, but by alternative supply of necessity. (Example: rice is an inelastic
necessity, demand will be the same irrespective of price. But using yams or
potatoes may act as a replacement to the demand of rice)
5

Solution offering
the operation of a subsidy is to reduce price, so lifting it will increase price.
Conclusion
Increasing price will not affect demand towards inelastic necessities thus people
will not be detered from consuming fuel
3. IMPLICATION ARGUMENTS
are action-reaction arguments. It analyses the consequences of the action proposed, be
it benefit or harm. Requires creativity in actors or stakeholders identification and how
they are related, which are the people involved around the issue. Who does what, what
the impacts are, who gets the impact (be it positive or negative).
The elements to prove it would be:
claimed implication, characterization of implicaton, and characterization of acclaimed
cause.

Claimed implication
what is the predicted effect, why is it bad/good
Characterization of implication
what are the natures and causes of the aforementioned implication
Characterization of acclaimed cause
what is the nature of the subject of the argument (directed in such way that it
seems to fulfil the causes of the aforementioned implication)
Conclusion
why would the subject of the arguent cause the aforementioned implication

Examples:
a. Women Quota will degrade women
b. Not covering illegal immigrants with free health insurance risks the spreading of
foreign disease
Other example:
Argument: free trade will kill local industries in Indonesia
Claimed implication
local industries falling will mean job losses to so many people, and depriving in
to poverty
Characterization of Claimed Implication
industries may fall when they can not compete in the market, therefore does not
have enough income to sustain its operation
Characterization of Acclaimed Cause
Free Trade brings in foreign industries in to the local market competition, which
the locals can not compete against.
Conclusion
Free Trade will create competitions which the locals cant compete against,
therefore will fall
(Similar examples to implication motions: Doraemon harms Nobita, Cosplay in the
workplace, the matrix, xmen, superheroes, harry potter, transformer, 9gag, superheores ignores emergency
calls, etc)

4.Hybrid Arguments,
as the term implies, are hybrids of the previous types of arguments two, or maybe
even three of them. Therefore, one argument doesnt always fall under only one
6

criterion as mentioned above. Thus an argument could have two or even three ways of
analysis.
Examples:
a. US method on terrorism hunt violates human rights (principle), thus it decreases
international respect and cooperation (implication) while international cooperation is
necessary to hunt terrorists who are multinational (effectiveness).
b. Subsidy helps alleviate poverty (effectiveness) which is government responsibility
(justification).