DEBATING - Draft 3 - Debate Central

[Pages:214]DEBATING

Simon Quinn

Available free at .

This book is dedicated to Andrew Denby, who repeatedly encouraged me to start writing this book.

He was a good friend and a really nice guy.

First published in Australia in 2005. Published electronically by the author in Brisbane, Queensland. Copyright ? Simon Quinn 2005 All rights reserved. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism, or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part of this book may be reproduced by any process without permission. Copyright owners may take legal action against a person or organisation that infringes their copyright through unauthorised copying. Inquiries should be directed to the author. Permission is given for this book, or any part of it, to be downloaded, printed and copied from the website . However, without the author's further express permission, you may not:

? provide any part of this book for download from any other website, ? profit in any way from the printing, distribution or promotion of any part of this

book, ? modify in any way any part of this book, ? represent ? explicitly or implicitly ? that any part of this book is the work of any

other author.

First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.

German Protestant Pastor Martin Niemoeller

Every idea is an incitement. It offers itself to belief and if believed is acted upon unless some other belief outweighs it or some failure of energy stifles the movement at its birth. The only difference between the expression of an opinion and an incitement in the narrowest sense is the speaker's enthusiasm for the result; eloquence may set fire to reason.

Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, dissenting in Gitlow v The State of New York (1925) 268 US 652

Free speech is life itself.

Salman Rushdie

CONTENTS

BEGINNER

INTRODUCTION DEBATING: A BASIC INTRODUCTION

BEGINNER INTERMEDIATE

CHAPTER ONE: PREPARATION

PREPARATION: THE BIG PICTURE

STEP ONE: THE ISSUE AND DEFINITION

FINDING THE BATTLEGROUND

FINDING THE ISSUE

THE DEFINITION

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION?

HOW TO DEFINE A TOPIC

LIMITING TOPICS BY DEFINITION

THE NEED FOR A NEUTRAL DEFINITION

THE RIGHT OF DEFINITION

NO EXCLUSIVE RIGHT

MORE REASONABLE

CLOSER TO THE `REAL' ISSUE OF THE TOPIC

THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT

TRIGGERS

TRIGGERS FOR WHAT YOUR TEAM NEEDS TO PROVE

`SHOULD'

`TOO'

WHEN `SHOULD' DOESN'T MEAN `A MORAL AND PRACTICAL IMPERATIVE' WHEN OTHER WORDS MEAN `A MORAL AND PRACTICAL IMPERATIVE'

`FAILED'

`BIG, RED BALL' TOPICS

TRIGGERS FOR THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOUR TEAM NEEDS TO PROVE ITS ARGUMENT

GENERAL TRUTH

ABSOLUTES

`JUSTIFY' TOPICS

THE CONFUSING WORDS `WE' AND `OUR'

TRIGGERS FOR DEVELOPING YOUR CASE

COMPARISON DEBATES

DEBATES ABOUT A PARTICULAR `AGE' OR `GENERATION'

TRIGGERS FOR DISCLAIMERS

SPECULATIVE DEBATES

SENSITIVITIES

Page

............ 1 ............ 3

............ 7 ............ 8 ............ 10 ............ 10 ............ 10 ............ 12 ............ 12 ............ 12 ............ 14 ............ 15 ............ 17 ............ 17 ............ 18 ............ 18 ............ 20 ............ 21

............ 21

............ 21 ............ 22

............ 23 ............ 24 ............ 24 ............ 25

............ 26

............ 27 ............ 28 ............ 29 ............ 30 ............ 31 ............ 31

............ 32

............ 33 ............ 33 ............ 33

BEGINNER INTERMEDIATE

ADVANCED

STEP TWO: THE CASE APPROACH THE `THEME' OR `CASELINE'

HOW OFTEN SHOULD THE THEME BE USED? HOW SHOULD THE THEME BE PRESENTED? THE TEAM STANCE A MODEL

HOW SPECIFIC DOES THE MODEL NEED TO BE?

AN ALTERNATIVE FROM THE NEGATIVE

IS THE ALTERNATIVE REALLY NECESSARY?

IS THE ALTERNATIVE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE TO THE TOPIC?

THE INVALID NEGATIVE DRAWING A `LINE IN THE SAND' A STANCE ON ASSOCIATED ISSUES IGNORING YOUR MODEL OR STANCE HOW NOT TO REBUT MODELS THE STRATEGY OF CASE DEVELOPMENT DEBATING: A GAME PLAYING HARDBALL FEAR COMPLEXITY, NOT CONTROVERSY PLAYING HARDBALL IS A WHOLE CASE APPROACH ARGUING `TOO MUCH'

1. BE AWARE THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO FIGHT EVERY LOGICAL PART OF THE TOPIC 2. BEWARE THE TEMPTATION TO MAKE YOUR CASE SOUND `TOO GOOD' 3. BE SPECIFIC

CRITERIA

WHAT ARE CRITERIA IN DEBATING?

USING CRITERIA

SETTING UP YOUR CRITERIA

REFERRING BACK TO CRITERIA

TAKING CRITERIA `TOO FAR'

`CRITERIA' ? A LOADED TERM

CRITERIA ? KEY POINTS

............ 35 ............ 35 ............ 36 ............ 36 ............ 37 ............ 38 ............ 38 ............ 39 ............ 41

............ 42

............ 43 ............ 43 ............ 46 ............ 48 ............ 48 ............ 50 ............ 50 ............ 51 ............ 53

............ 56

............ 57

............ 57

............ 58

............ 59 ............ 60 ............ 60 ............ 62 ............ 62 ............ 62 ............ 63 ............ 65 ............ 65

BEGINNER INTERMEDIATE

STEP THREE: THE ARGUMENTS THE BASIC APPROACH

WHAT DO WE MEAN BY AN `ARGUMENT'?

WHY DO WE NEED DISTINCT ARGUMENTS?

THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF AN ARGUMENT

HOW MANY ARGUMENTS DO YOU NEED?

EXAMPLES

ANALYSIS OF EXAMPLES

WEAK ANALYSIS: A CASE STUDY

ADDING MORE EXAMPLES

STATISTICS OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO EXAMPLES FINDING MATTER

NEWS AND CURRENT AFFAIRS

RESEARCH

FABRICATING MATTER

............ 66 ............ 66 ............ 66 ............ 66 ............ 67 ............ 69 ............ 69 ............ 71 ............ 71 ............ 73 ............ 74 ............ 74 ............ 76 ............ 76 ............ 76 ............ 77

ADVANCED

CREDIBILITY IN PRESENTING MATTER

`HOME TURF' EXAMPLES

USE OF SUBSTANTIATION ELSEWHERE IN YOUR CASE SOPHISTICATION IN EXPLANATION TESTING YOUR ARGUMENTS SPECIFIC WEAKNESSES

INCONSISTENCY INSIGNIFICANCE ARGUMENTS THAT ARE TOO GENERAL IRRELEVANCE DEPENDENT ARGUMENTS

CONCLUSION TO STEP THREE

............ 77 ............ 78

............ 79

............ 80 ............ 82 ............ 82 ............ 82 ............ 83 ............ 83 ............ 84 ............ 84 ............ 86

BEGINNER INTERMEDIATE

STEP FOUR: THE SPLIT THE BASIC CONCEPT

CHOOSING THE GROUPINGS A `HUNG CASE' COMMON SPLITS WHERE TO START? MATTER SPLITS

............ 87 ............ 87 ............ 87 ............ 88 ............ 90 ............ 90 ............ 91

BEGINNER

STEP FIVE: PREPARING INDIVIDUAL SPEECHES

THE NEED FOR STRUCTURE SPEAKER ROLES SIGNPOSTING A FORMAL INTRODUCTION A BRIEF INTRODUCTION SETTING UP YOUR TEAM'S APPROACH A BRIEF LINK TO THE TEAM CASE THE OUTLINE AND SUMMARY A CONCLUSION TIMING

............ 93 ............ 93 ............ 93 ............ 95 ............ 95 ............ 96 ............ 96 ............ 97 ............ 97 ............ 98 ............ 98

BEGINNER

INTERMEDIATE ADVANCED

TEAMWORK IN PREPARATION INTRODUCTION THE BASICS

BASIC STEPS

BRAINSTORMING FEEDING BACK CASE DEVELOPMENT WRITING SPEECHES FINAL DISCUSSIONS

RESOLVING DIFFERENCES OF OPINION SHORT PREPARATION BEFORE THE DEBATE

THE BASIC TIMING HASTENING SLOWLY LEADERSHIP

SHORT PREPARATION DURING THE DEBATE

DECIDING TO ABANDON YOUR CASE START WITH THE `BIG PICTURE'

............ 100 ............ 100 ............ 100 ............ 100 ............ 100 ............ 101 ............ 102 ............ 102 ............ 103 ............ 103 ............ 104 ............ 105 ............ 105 ............ 106 ............ 107 ............ 107 ............ 108

CHAPTER TWO: REBUTTAL

BEGINNER INTERMEDIATE

ADVANCED

THE IMPORTANCE OF REBUTTAL WHAT SHOULD YOU REBUT?

REBUTTING YOUR OPPOSITION'S THEME REBUTTING EXAMPLES AND STATISTICS REBUTTING REBUTTAL THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING THOROUGH

PREPARING FOR REBUTTAL

DEFINITIONAL REBUTTAL DEFINITIONAL RULES REVISITED DECIDING TO REBUT YOUR OPPOSITION'S DEFINITION HOW TO REBUT THE DEFINITION DEFINITIONAL CHALLENGES AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE DEBATE AS A WHOLE THE DEFINITIONAL `EVEN IF' DEALING WITH AN UNREASONABLE DEFINITION PARALLEL CASES: A SPECIAL ISSUE

THE INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF A REBUTTAL POINT THE OVERALL STRUCTURE OF REBUTTAL

STARTING YOUR REBUTTAL STRATEGIC ALLOCATION OF REBUTTAL TIME FIRST AND SECOND SPEAKER STRUCTURE THIRD SPEAKER STRUCTURE KEY GROUNDS FOR REBUTTAL LOGICAL IRRELEVANCE INSIGNIFICANCE THE TECHNIQUE OF CONCESSION FACTUAL INACCURACY UNSUBSTANTIATED ASSERTIONS UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS CAUSATION CONTRADICTIONS MISREPRESENTATION CUMULATIVE REBUTTAL

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER THREE: MANNER

GENERAL

INTRODUCTION BEING YOURSELF VISUAL PRESENTATION

START FROM THE VERY BEGINNING EYE CONTACT GESTURE STANCE MANNERISMS

VOCAL PRESENTATION

SPEED VOLUME

............ 109

............ 110 ............ 110 ............ 111 ............ 112 ............ 112 ............ 113 ............ 113 ............ 114 ............ 114

............ 115

............ 116

............ 117

............ 119

............ 121

............ 122 ............ 122 ............ 124 ............ 124 ............ 124 ............ 125 ............ 126 ............ 128 ............ 128 ............ 129 ............ 130 ............ 130 ............ 132 ............ 132 ............ 134 ............ 134 ............ 135 ............ 136 ............ 137

............ 139

............ 140 ............ 140 ............ 141 ............ 141 ............ 141 ............ 142 ............ 143 ............ 143 ............ 144 ............ 144 ............ 144

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download