take a stand!

TAKE A STAND!

An Introduction to Debate and Argumentation

Who are We?

The UP Debate Society is the official representative of UP Diliman to national and international debate tournaments and fora.

We are committed to promote creative critical thinking & social concern through excellence in the art of debating.

The UPDS Debate Education Program

To extend its commitment to debate excellence, UPDS also sponsors debate education through its programs such as Take A Stand and Fast Forward aiming to spread the culture of debate in our country.

We take pride of our strong pool of member-debaters. Our most recent achievement is in PIDC 2009 where our Team A bagged home the national Asians championship.

MODULE CONTENTS

An Introduction to Debate

Basics The Art/Sport/Science of Debate

what is it in the first place?

Part 1 Analysis and Argumentation debate’s basic currency

Part 2 Debate Rules and Formatsputting arguments in real

action

Part 3 Rebuttals and POI’snegating isn’t everything

DEBATE IS…an intellectual discourseGiven an issue, it emphasizes:

reasoned & persuasive argumentation

tolerance for divergent points of view

rigorous self-examination

a discipline a method of thinking calls for a robust analysis of an

issue at hand and from the many things we know, choose only the relevant and significant knowledge in explaining our stand.

a game! a conversation

with RULES persuasiveness

of arguments is qualified with clear standards and procedures of logic and judgments

like a sport, both skills and adherence to the rules matter.

Introduction to Debate

We debate because: “It is better to debate a question without

settling it, than to settle a question without debating it.” – Joseph Joubert

It is an essential tool for developing and maintaining democratic and open societies

It is tool for personal development: self-confidence, critical-thinking, effective communication skills, wit and quick-mindedness

“I think, therefore I am.”

Analysis and Argumentation

There’s always something to be said and explained.

What are arguments?

They are proofs derived from logical explanation and facts used to either support or oppose a topic/stand.

THINGS TO NOTE: There is something to be proven It relies on clear logic It becomes more persuasive when derived

from/ supported by facts (matter)

Arguments are statements of analysis. Therefore, your basic weapon is the ability to ask questions.

what? why?

who?when?

where?how?

so what?

Basic Structure of an Argument

PREMISEGrounding of the argument, a basic

fact or a hard-to-contest notion

ANALYSISLogical extension, implication, links

EVIDENCE AND EXAMPLE

Matter to support and further prove the case

BANNER

CONCLUSION & TIEBACK

Banner Statement/Label• Phrase or sentence that encapsulates the

argument• Reminder: use simple words especially

for complex arguments • Give more emphasis on analysis than on

packagingNote that banner statements provide the first impression to your argument, so your choice of words is paramount.

CONSTRUCTIVELY SPEAKING

Establishment of premises– Premises are facts or generally

accepted notions that serve as the foundation of the case.

– Two ways to use premises: •Give all the premises at the start of argumentation.

•Ration off premises in different parts of the argument with logical explanations.


Logical Implications and Extensions– Logical implications are semi-

conclusions that you can derive from premises you already have. (SO WHAT?)

– Logical extensions are causal or analysis links from one logical implication to another. (HOW?)

– The chain of logical implications and extensions must link all the premises with the conclusion.


Illustrative example• Concretization of general analysis• Illustrates the steps in the logical

extension and presents a realistic bigger picture where your argument will be in.

• Use your matter to make it more realistic

•Previous experiences•Case studies•Street knowledge


Conclusion and Tieback– What does all the things you say lead

to? Conclusion summarizes your argument and then highlights its:–relevance to your stand–importance in assessing the issue

– Conclusions must explain why the idea you presented answers your burden of proof.


Class Exercise: Concept Mapping

ISSUE

STAKEHOLDER A

Why is A impt/relevant?

What will A most likely say? think?

do?

STAKEHOLDER B

Why is B impt/relevant?

What will B most likely say? think?

do?

STAKEHOLDER C

Why is C impt/relevant?

What will C most likely say? think?

do?

Notes on Constructive Material:

But be careful! –

EMBEDDING ARGUMENTS Context Standards Model Framework

STAKEHOLDER AWhy is A impt/

relevant?What will A most likely say? think?

do?One strand of perspective may be equal to one argument!

CHARACTERIZATIONand the

BIGGER PICTURE

The Asians Parliamentary Format

The intersection of argumentation with technicalities to formalize the

conversation.

DEBATE FLOW

PrimeMinister

Deputy PrimeMinister

GovernmentReply

Leader ofOpposition

Deputy Leaderof Opposition

OppositionReply

Government Whip

OppositionWhip

• 2 opposing teams: Government (Affirmative) versus Opposition (Negative)

• Each team is given a motion and 30 minutes of “prep” time to build a case and get ready for the debate

• Each speech takes 7 minutes long, with the first and last minute being uninterrupted (no points of information)

THE BASICS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Speaker Roles

All for one, one for all

– Three Muskeeters

• Prime Minister (PM)– Defines the motion– Outlines the team’s allocation of

arguments according to speakers (split)– Delivers his part of the Government split

• Leader of Opposition (LO)– Shows the difference of the Opposition

stand vs. the Government stand (clash) – Rebuts the PM’s arguments

SPEAKER ROLES

– Outlines the team’s allocation of arguments according to speakers (split)

– Delivers the first portion of the split

• Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)– Rebuts the LO’s arguments – Delivers the second portion of the split– Summarizes and rebuilds the

Government case

SPEAKER ROLES

• Deputy Leader of Opposition (DLO)– Rebuts the DPM’s arguments – Delivers second portion of the split– Summarizes and rebuilds the Opposition

case

SPEAKER ROLES

• Government Whip (GW)– Rebuts the arguments of Government– Rebuild, defend and strengthen the

arguments of the Government’s constructive speakers

• Opposition Whip (OW) Rebut the arguments of the Government Rebuild, defend and strengthen the

arguments of the Opposition’s constructive speakers

SPEAKER ROLES

• Team Replies– Delivered either by 1st or 2nd Speaker– Biased explanation why you should win the

debate

Speaker Roles are…

A matter of strategy – in order to win, there must be ways to persuade more (CONSTRUCT), respond to the other side (REBUT) and reiterate your side (REBUILD)

A way to allocate labor: the impossibility of a genius sent from heaven to explain everything in 7 minutes Team camaraderie and consistency

Motions, Setups and Clashes

• A motion is a topic to be discussed in a given debate.

• It is a complete statement that the Government bench is expected to affirm and the Opposition bench is expected to deny.

Examples: THW require models to have a minimum

body mass index.TH supports the politicization of Hollywood.

MOTIONS

• The way the motion is to be understood in the debate at hand is presented using a set-up. The set-up is a framework within which the entire debate occurs.

• A set-up generally includes the following components: Context – Where is this debate taking

place? Definition – What will the words or

phrases in the motion mean for the purposes of this debate?

SET-UPS

Question – What is the main question of the debate?

Measure – What goal is both sides trying to achieve through their respective stances? What standards do we use for determining whether the motion, as understood in the debate, is true or false?

Note: Each constructive speech must address ALL standards provided in the set-up

SET-UPS

SET-UPS: Class Exercise!Construct a set-up. (until measure only)

Given: THBT political dynasties are the bane of democracy.Context: PhilippinesDefinition:

Political dynasties – family groups that regularly field members to elections and whose members hold offices simultaneously or practically consecutively

Bane of democracy – detrimental to democracy

Question: Do political dynasties hurt Philippine democracy?Measure: Goal – promotion of democratic development in the Philippines

• Notice that a motion and/or a set-up implies the nature of the debate.Assessment or value judgment debate

• The motion, as understood by the definition, is examined for its truth-value (true or false).

• It does not necessarily present a course of action to be undertaken by a particular actor or consolidated group of actors.

• e.g. The motion on political dynasties as set-up in the previous slide.

SET-UPS

SET-UPSPolicy or proposal debate

• It recommends a course of action that may be undertaken by a particular actor or consolidated group of actors.

• The central issues are often what principles must be protected and how a policy attempts to fulfil those principles.

• e.g. The motion above is set up in such a way that the question of the debate becomes: Should we ban family members from occupying elected government offices simultaneously and/or consecutively?

SET-UPS

Comparison debate• e.g. A debate about whether democracy or

authoritarianism is the better political system for the Philippines.

Note: These three types of debates are NOT mutually exclusive categories. In fact, to some extent, all motions can be perceived as subspecies of assessment debates.

Workshop

Construct a Prime Minister Speech

THBT cream sections should be abolished.

The clash is the stance of the Opposition bench that:

– Is mutually exclusive from the stance of the Government as provided by the motion and the stance they themselves took.

– Responds to the burden of the Opposition bench required by the motion and the set-up.

– This is the Opposition’s setup

CLASHES

Standard ways to clash in policy debates1. The policy is ineffective/counterproductive in

achieving its goal. (That’s why the status quo is still better.)

2. The policy sacrifices other goals equal or higher in value. (That’s why the status quo is still better.)

3. There are better alternatives to the policy—more effective or equally effective without sacrificing other important goals.

CLASHES

Debate Team SpiritDebate Team Spirit

STANCE The principle and the spirit where the

whole team banks on

WORKING MODELThe manifestation of the stance;

explicit position of the team on the issue

ARGUMENTExplanation and defense of the model

What?

How? Who?When? Where?

Why?So

What?

ISSUE/PROBLEM

How will you be judged? Speaker Assessment

Elements of Speech MATTER MANNER METHOD

Speaker Roles Debate Assessment

The adjudicator should look at what was said in the context of a bigger picture.

Envisioning the debate.

Rebuttals and POI’s

Putting more action and dynamism in the debate

Why do we need to rebut?

To respond and engage You analyze and digest what the other team said You found a logical error/leap You saw a false matter You just think it is ridiculous

To be defensive You want to persuade them back to your side. There might be truth to what they are saying but

yours is better.

3 DEADLY SINS

• Always be on the lookout for the following most common speaker mistakes:

Assertion – statement made without appropriate evidenceDeviation – straying from the topic Insufficiency – missing links, tiebacks, and examples that give less weight to the potency of an argument

COUNTER-ARGUMENTS

Structure for Counter-Arguments• Restatement of banner or target argument/issue

– Use the exact banner used by the opposing speaker – Simplify the banner if it’s too complicated

• Brief explanation of target argument/issue’s logic– Explain or reiterate logical extensions/implications

and conclusions raised by the argument– Criticize analysis

COUNTER-ARGUMENTS

• Negation of Target Argument– Kill the argument! – Provide the lethal blow.

• Conclusion– Pull the arguments to your side. – Provide further analysis/interpretation of

facts with respect to the argument you just killed.

REBUTTALS

Before rebutting• Identify the banner statement, premise,

logical implications, extensions and conclusions of an argument.

• Examine any faults you see with regards to wrong premises, consistency and logical reasoning.

• Proceed with debunking the argument.

Steps for Rebutting Identify the argument you wish to debunk Briefly explain the gist of the argument Explain why argument is wrong Explain how the wrongness of the argument

means they do not achieve the goal of the debateNote: A wrong argument isn’t necessarily false. An

argument can be true, but at the same time wrong in terms of resolving the issue of the debate.

REBUTTALS

Techniques for Rebutting Negate the argument State the higher value Rebut the premise Concede but say that there’s a higher value

at stake State that the argument is irrelevant Contextualise

REBUTTALS

2 Ways to Rebut an ArgumentOver-all evaluation of argument

• Irrelevant• Illogical - conclusion doesn’t follow premise• Unreasonable - argument not enough reason (too

petty, too small, too minor an issue) to support a stance

• False - argument is dead wrong, e.g. premise is dead wrong or characterization is inaccurate

• Inconsistent - argument contradicts other arguments of the same side, or non-even-if rebuttals

REBUTTALS

REBUTTALS

PREMISEGrounding of the argument, a basic

fact or a hard-to-contest notion

ANALYSISLogical extension, implication, links

EVIDENCE AND EXAMPLE

Matter to support and further prove the case

BANNER

Surgical Rebuttal 1:

Kill the strongest part of the argument: Analysis

Surgical Rebuttal 2:

Find the argument’s mother: its

Assumptions

Meta-rebuttal:Respond to their goals, directions,

standards and principles.

REBUTTAL SPEECHES

Whip Speakers• Rebuttal, summation speakers• GW has the advantage over OW regarding

the introduction of new matter. However, this advantage must be used sparingly.

• Introduction of new matter gives adjudicators the impression that MG was insufficient in providing constructive material. So be careful.

• May be justified if MO introduced a completely new issue that was unadressed in the debate.

Organizing the Whip Speech Point by Point Method Issue by Issue Method By Team MethodNotes: In all of the above methods, whip must first

identify the issues he/she wishes to discuss in his/her speech, numbered in particular order of discussion

Issue method requires the justification: Why did you pick these issues? How were they relevant to the debate?

REBUTTAL SPEECHES

POI’s are 15-second interjections, acceptable only after the first minute and before the last minute of a speech

A powerful POI can undermine and even destroy an opponent’s argument.

POI’s must be made as strategically as possible to put the speaker on the defensive and make him justify his stance.

POINTS OF INFORMATION

Delivering Points of InformationKeep it short and to the point.Make a sharp question that demands an

answer.Clarify anything vague about the setup/clash

and arguments of the opposing team.


Variations of POIs• Give a point of clarification• Give a counter-example.• Raise a what-if question.• Show an error of logic.• Show lack of relevance.• Cross-examine evidence.


What to remember Handling a POI requires calculation

How many to accept? Whom to accept? When to accept?

Take POIs only after you are done with your argument or setup.

Always remember: Answering a POI takes your time Always deal with the offered point Never easily dismiss points


Looking it from a bird’s eye view

Debates are dynamic – you can be questioned anytime.

It requires active processing and quick yet still logical thinking

It demands on-debate adjustments and compromises, what you prepare would not always what will be exactly said

Pre-debate PM LO Reply

Thank you!

UP Debate Society

Application Process 2009

Orientation on July 17, 2009

School of Economics

Contact Ana - 09178331603

take a stand!

Documents