DEBATE Debate is the art of persuasion.

As an art, it helps develop specific skills; and most importantly, very valuable paradigms critical for citizens in any democracy. Whats so good about debating? Debate helps develop critical thinking skills Debate improves listening, language and communication skills Debate is a learning process Debate fosters issue awareness Debate develops tolerant and open-minded future leaders Debate is fun WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT? When people create and critique arguments, it's helpful to understand what an argument is and is not. Sometimes an argument is seen as a verbal fight, but that is not what is meant in these discussions. Sometimes a person thinks they are offering an argument when they are only providing assertions. Perhaps the simplest explanation of what an argument is comes from Monty Pythons Argument Clinic sketch: An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a definite proposition. ...an argument is an intellectual process... contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says. This may have been a comedy sketch, but it highlights a common misunderstanding: to offer an argument, you cannot simply make a claim or gainsay what others claim. An argument is a deliberate attempt to move beyond just making an assertion. When offering an argument, you are offering a series of related statements which represent an attempt to support that assertion to give others good reasons to believe that what you are asserting is true rather than false. Here are examples of assertions: 1. Shakespeare wrote the play Hamlet. 2. The Civil War was caused by disagreements over slavery. 3. God exists. 4. Prostitution is immoral. Sometimes you hear such statements referred to as propositions. Technically speaking, a proposition is the informational content of any statement or assertion. To qualify as a proposition, a statement must be capable of being either true or false. The above represent positions people hold, but which others may disagree with. Merely making the above statements does not constitute an argument; no matter how often one repeats the assertions. To create an argument, the person making the claims must offer further statements which, at least in theory, support the claims. If the claim is supported, the argument is successful; if the claim is not supported, the argument fails. This is the purpose of an argument: to offer reasons and evidence for the purpose of establishing the truth value of a proposition, which can mean either establishing that the proposition is true or establishing that the proposition is false. If a series of statements does not do this, it isnt an argument. Motion A motion is a general unambiguously-worded statement or proposition that is given to the debaters as an indication of what the topic of the debate is going to be about.

There are 3 kinds of motions 1. OPEN MOTION the first kind, which can be defined quite liberally. An example of an open motion is This house should apologize. ( e.g. Japanese people issuing an apology to comfort women; Australian Government issuing an apology for the aborigines of the Stolen Generation)

2. SEMI-CLOSED MOTION, which is the middle-ground in how much leeway the PM has in defining the motion. This house would regulate free trade. With a motion such as this, there are still a lot of things that need to be defined, such as who should regulate free trade and what aspect of it. 3. CLOSED MOTION it is the most limiting in terms of defining motions. Example: This house believes that the World Trade Organization should liberalize agriculture trade. In this case, it leaves no doubt that the definition should be about how the WTO should proceed about liberalizing agriculture trade. Definition Definitions must have a clear and logical link to the motion. Motions must be defined according to the spirit of the motion. This means that while a motion may indicate a general idea, there is probably a specific topic that the motion is trying to pinpoint for debate and this is the expected definition that most debaters will look for. (Discretion of PM) Definitional Challenges Who May Initiate a Definitional Challenge and On What Grounds is a Definitional Challenge Issued? Definitions may be challenged if they are either of the following: truism, squirrel, time set, and place set. Aspects of a Good Definition the Specifics WHAT is the proposal all about? policy is going to be implemented? are the issues in the debate? problem is the debate seeking to resolve? WHO is involved? will be implementing the policy? WHY is this proposal important? is the principle relevant? Standards What debaters usually envision to be the measuring stick of the effectivity of their proposal or the correctness of their arguments. Example: THBT carbon trading works A standard defining works is essential in proving the motion. You can provide a standard of whether or not the carbon trading proposal works if it meets any of these criteria: 1. if it decreases pollution 2. if it increases participation from other state and non-state actors in solving the environmental problem Parameters Parameters just like standards provide more clarity in defining issues for debate. The function of parameters is to set the scope for the debate, or its limitations. Following the previous example, the parameter for that same debate could be that the implementation of the policy is limited to the case of first world nations. Case Construction At the heart of every good debate is the quality of argumentation. We stress the word quality to indicate that ultimately the most important factors in any persuasive speech are the explanation and analysis presented by the speaker. Academic debate is not about how many arguments you can come up with, nor is it about how often you repeat them. Structuring Your Case Generally speaking, a good constructive speech will contain around 2-4 well-analyzed arguments. It is important to outline your arguments at the beginning and at the end of your speech to make it easier for judges to follow you; this is what is usually referred to as signposting. Rebuttal (except for the Prime Minister) Case Outline- Argument, Argument 2, Argument 3 Argument 1- Label

Analysis Example Argument 2Argument 3Label Analysis Example Label Analysis Example Case Summary- Argument, Argument 2, Argument 3 Labeling Your Argument Novice debaters may feel that a fancier sounding label can be more convincing. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Make sure that your label is straight to the point and captures the basic thought behind your argument. Use simple terms which are easy to remember. Note that your labels are usually the first things which adjudicators will write down and they may play an important role when the adjudicators review their notes. What is good analysis? Arguments are analyzed in order to convince the judges or the audience of their merit. This involves proving your arguments by providing examples and showing the reasoning behind them. Explaining the reasoning behind your argument usually requires you to answer two questions: why? and so what? For instance, you want to argue that Proposal A is bad because it leads to X. It is not enough to say that it leads to X; you have to show why it leads to X and in most cases how it leads to X. The process of asking these questions can often lead you to search for deeper and deeper explanations. Example: This House Would Legalize Prostitution Argument: Legalizing prostitution will lead to greater protection of women. Why? Legalizing prostitution will lead to greater protection of women because once the occupation is legalized; prostitutes will be allowed to access the services of law enforcement agencies and the courts to combat abusive clients and agents. So what? Such a policy of legalization and protection is more in line with government responsibility. Given the governments inability to provide viable job alternatives or social services, the least it can do is extend legal protection to women who are left with no choice by poverty but to engage in the sex trade. Using Examples One of the most common mistakes made by debaters is substituting examples for analysis. For instance, We should legalize prostitution because in Victoria it helped protect women. Examples should be used to strengthen or prove the explanation for an argument. They should not be expected to stand alone. POIs Keep it short: You just have fifteen seconds! It is the discretion of the person speaking whether to recognize the point or not Types of POIs: Clarification Question Direct rebuttal Introducing your argument Bringing back your argument