How to DebateThree Methods:Formal T

How to Debate
Three Methods:Formal Team DebateConversational or Informal DebatingSample Debates
There are many types of debates, ranging from British Parliamentary, Asian Debate Format, Policy Debates to regular old backyard sparring sessions. Whether you're in a team or going at it solo, this article will go over some general facts about debating, as well as offer you tips on how to improve your technique.
Ad


Method 1 of 2: Formal Team Debate
Debate Step 1.jpg1
Be ready to receive a topic to get to go debate on. One team must debate the "affirmative" stance, and the other must debate the "negative" stance. The team that agrees with the topic is called the affirmative, while the team that disagrees is called the negative.
Both teams will be seated near the front of the room they are to speak in — affirmative team (Government) on the left, negative team (Opposition) on the right.
The chairperson or adjudicator will start the debate, and the first speaker will present their speech. The order of the speakers is generally affirmative, negative, affirmative, negative, and so on.
Ad


Debate Step 2.jpg2
Define the topic, if necessary. Debating "That the death penalty is a just and effective punishment" is probably already pretty clear, but what if you're given a topic like "That happiness is a nobler trait than wisdom?" You might need to offer a definition before you proceed.
The affirmative always gets the first and best opportunity to define the topic. The first affirmative should offer the "person on the street"[1] test:
How might an average person on the street define the topic? Is it reasonable to expect a "normal" person to think of the topic in a certain way?
The negative team is given an opportunity to refute the definition (otherwise known as challenging the definition) and offer their own, but only if the affirmative's definition is unreasonable or it renders the negative's position obsolete. The first negative speaker must refute the affirmative's definition if s/he wishes to challenge it.
Debate Step 3.jpg3
Write your argument according to the designated time limit (Usually 7 minutes). Depending on what position you argue, you must follow certain protocol such as defining the topic or presenting a main argument.
Support your opinions/contentions. If you say "I think the death penalty should be abolished," be ready to prove why this is the best course of action.
Use religion only when appropriate. Things that are written in the Bible, Torah, Koran, etc, are not usually sound resources to use to prove your argument, as not everyone takes these sources to be the truth.
If you don't know it, don't debate it unless you have no other choice. If you don't know much about the topic, try and at least come up with some vague, ambiguous information so that your opponents will have a hard time refuting your contentions. If they don't understand it, they can't refute it. Keep in mind that the judge probably won't understand you so well either, but trying is probably better than saying, "I know nothing. I give the case to my opponents."
Don't use rhetorical questions. Always give a clear answer to every question you ask. Leaving a question open-ended gives your opponents room to refute.
Debate Step 4.jpg4
Present your argument. When it is your turn, go ahead and present your argument. Be passionate in your speech—a monotone voice will cause people to drift off, and they may miss the point of what you're trying to say. Speak clearly, slowly, and loudly.
Make eye contact with whomever decides the winners of the debate. While it's okay to look at your opponents every once in a while, try to direct your argument at the judge.
Give a layout of your argument before you make it. That way, your audience will know what to expect and your judge won't cut you off unless you run way overtime.
Debate Step 5.jpg


5
Strike a balance between presenting your team's point(s) and rebutting the opponents' point. Since teams take turns debating, it's always possible to offer rebuttals unless you are the first affirmative speaker. Here is a rundown of how both teams might organize their debate strategy:
1st affirmative:
Define the topic (optional) and present the team's main line.
Outline, in brief, what each affirmative speaker will talk about.
Present the first half of the affirmative's argument.
1st negative:
Accept or reject the definition (optional) and present the team's main line.
Outline, in brief, what each negative speaker will talk about.
Offer a rebuttal of a few of the points presented by the first affirmative.
Present the first half of the negative's argument.
2nd affirmative:
Reaffirm the affirmative's main line.
Offer a rebuttal of a few of the points presented by the first negative.
Present the second half of the affirmative's argument.
2nd negative:
Reaffirm the negative's main line.
Offer a rebuttal of a few of the points presented by the second affirmative.
Present the second half of the negative's argument.
3rd affirmative:
Reaffirm the affirmative's main line.
Offer a rebuttal of any of the remaining negative's arguments.
Offer a summary of the affirmative's case.
Conclude debate for the affirmative team.
3rd negative:
Reaffirm the negative's main line.
Offer a rebuttal of any of the remaining affirmative's arguments.
Offer a summary of the negative's case.
Conclude debate for the negative team.
Debate Step 6.jpg6
Note the three rules of rebuttal. When rebutting a team's argument, remember three essential rules:
Offer evidence for your rebuttal. Do not rely on vigorous assertion alone. Show the chairperson why the other team's argument is fundamentally flawed; don't just tell.
Attack the most important parts of their argument. It's not very effective if you pick bones with an obscure part of the opponent's argument. Go for the crux of their argument and pick it apart with the ruthless efficiency of a surgeon.
No ad hominem attacks. An ad hominem attack is when you criticize another person instead of his or her ideas. Attack the idea, not the person.
Debate Step 7.jpg7
Use up all your time (or most of it). The more you talk, the more you'll convince the judge. Note that this means you should come up with many examples, not that you should ramble. The more the judge hears about why you are correct, the more inclined s/he will be to believe you.
Debate Step 8.jpg8
Know what aspects of the debate you will be judged on, if appropriate. For the most part, debates are judged on three main areas: matter, manner, and method.[1]
Matter:
Amount of evidence. How much evidence does the speaker marshall to support his/her claims?
Relevancy of evidence. How strongly does the evidence used support the argument?
Manner:
Eye contact. How well does the speaker engage his or her audience? Does the speaker spend too much time on his or her cue cards?
Voice. How well does the speaker's voice accentuate his or her argument? Does he or she offer a diversity of volume, pitch and speed to highlight important parts?
Body language. How well does the speaker use his or her body to emphasize arguments and communicate authority and calmness?
Nervous habits. How well does the speaker avoid verbal and bodily tics when he or she speaks? Does the speaker stammer, fidget, or pace?
Elocution. How clearly does the speaker pronounce words? Does the speaker use words, or do the words use him or her?
Method:
Team cohesion. How well does the entire team organize their arguments and rebuttals? How well do the individual arguments mesh together, as well as the rebuttals? How clear and consistent is the team line?
Individual prowess. How well does the individual stand out as he or she speaks? How clearly does he or she mark the end of one argument and the beginning of another?
Ad


Method 2 of 2: Conversational or Informal Debating
Debate Step 9.jpg1
Ask questions to gradually reveal an argument. Since you're not engaging in a formal debate, you don't really know what side of the argument the other person is going to take, or what they necessarily believe in. Ask questions to narrow things down.
"So do you believe that the gap in the fossil record says anything serious about Darwinism?"
"Do you have an opinion on the question of nature v. nurture?"
"So what's your position when it comes to affirmative action?"
Debate Step 10.jpg2
Clearly understand the other person's position or ask them to clarify any confusing areas. Nobody's Weltanschauung is perfectly coherent. But it's hard to debate someone when they're all over the place. Try to gently get them to adhere to one line of arguments that are more or less consistent.
If you're not sure about what their argument is, help them out in a non-threatening way: "So, if I understand what you're saying, you mean that the penny should be abolished because it costs more than a penny to produce a penny?"
Debate Step 11.jpg3
Introduce your counterargument. Introducing your counterargument after the other person has made their argument clear makes things feel less antagonistic, even if it's still a debate.
Offer examples along with your thesis for why you hold a particular belief:
"Here's what I think: I think overabundance of political correctness has actually made us afraid to say anything at all. Instead of saying what we actually mean, we say what we think people want to hear. We're more worried about offending other people than we are about telling the truth."
Debate Step 12.jpg4
Offer rebuttals to the other person's argument. State your counterargument first, and then offer any rebuttals that you can think of.
"Does it really make sense to say that any form of government — municipal, state, or federal — should legislate sexual morality? It's not a question of "could" — they're more than capable of doing it; it's more a question of whether it's right for them to say how we should treat our own bodies in the privacy of our own home. Where does it stop if we let them get a foot in the door? Wouldn't that

Kết quả (Anh) 1:

How to DebateThree Methods: Formal or Informal Debates DebatingSample DebateConversational TeamThere are many types of debates, ranging from the British Parliamentary Debate Format, Asian, Policy Debates to regular old backyard sparring sessions. Whether you're in a team or going at it solo, this article will go over some general facts about debating, as well as offer you tips on how to improve your technique.Ad Method 1 of 2: Formal Debate TeamDebate Step 1. jpg1Be ready to receive a topic to get to go debate on. One team must debate the "affirmative" stance, and the other must debate the "negative" stance. The team that agrees with the topic is called the affirmative, while the team that disagrees is called the negative.Both teams will be seated near the front of the room they are to speak in — affirmative team (Government) on the left, the negative team (Opposition) on the right.The chairperson or adjudicator will start the debate, and the first speaker will present their speech. The order of the speakers is generally affirmative, negative, affirmative, negative, and so on.Ad Debate Step 2. jpg2Define the topic, if necessary. Debating "That the death penalty is a just and effective punishment" is probably already pretty clear, but what if you're given a topic like "That happiness is a nobler trait than wisdom?" You might need to offer a definition before you proceed.The affirmative always gets the first and best opportunity to define the topic. The first affirmative should offer the "person on the street" [1] test:How might an average person on the street to define the topic? Is it reasonable to expect a "normal" person to think of the topic in a certain way?The negative team is given an opportunity to refute the definition (otherwise known as challenging the definition) and offer their own, but only if the affirmative's definition is unreasonable or it renders the negative's position obsolete. The first negative speaker must refute the affirmative's definition if s/he wishes to challenge it.Debate Step 3. jpg3Write your argument according to the designated time limit (Usually 7 minutes). Depending on what position you argue, you must follow certain protocol such as defining the topic or presenting a main argument.Support your contentions/opinions. If you say "I think the death penalty should be abolished," be ready to prove why this is the best course of action.Use religion only when appropriate. Things that are written in the Bible, Torah, Koran, etc, are not usually sound resources to use to prove your argument, as not everyone takes these sources to be the truth.If you don't know it, don't debate it unless you have no other choice. If you don't know much about the topic, try and at least come up with some vague, ambiguous information so that your opponents will have a hard time refuting your contentions. If they don't understand it, they can't refute it. Keep in mind that the judge probably won't understand you so well either, but trying is probably better than saying, "I know nothing. I give the case to my opponents. "Don't use rhetorical questions. Always give a clear answer to every question you ask. Leaving a question open-ended gives your opponents room to refute.Debate Step 4. jpg4Present your argument. When it is your turn, go ahead and present your argument. Be passionate in your speech — a monotone voice will cause people to drift off, and they may miss the point of what you're trying to say. Speak clearly, slowly, and loudly.Make eye contact with whomever decides the winners of the debate. While it's okay to look at your opponents every once in a while, try to direct your argument at the judge.Give a layout of your argument before you make it. That way, your audience will know what to expect and your judge won't cut you off unless you run way overtime.Debate Step 5 .jpg5Strike a balance between presenting your team's point (s) and rebutting the opponents ' point. Since teams take turns debating, it's always possible to offer rebuttals unless you are the first affirmative speaker. Here is a rundown of how both teams might organize their debate strategy:1st affirmative:Define the topic (optional) and present the team's main line.Outline, in brief, what each affirmative speaker will talk about.Present the first half of the affirmative's argument.1st negative:Accept or reject the definition (optional) and present the team's main line.Outline, in brief, what each negative speaker will talk about.Offer a rebuttal of a few of the points presented by the first affirmative.Present the first half of the negative's argument.2nd affirmative:Reaffirm the affirmative's main line.Offer a rebuttal of a few of the points presented by the first negative.Present the second half of the affirmative's argument.2nd negative:Reaffirm the negative's main line.Offer a rebuttal of a few of the points presented by the second affirmative.Present the second half of the negative's argument.3rd affirmative:Reaffirm the affirmative's main line.Offer a rebuttal of any of the remaining negative's arguments.Offer a summary of the affirmative's case.Conclude debate for the affirmative team.3rd negative:Reaffirm the negative's main line.Offer a rebuttal of any of the remaining affirmative's arguments.Offer a summary of the negative's case.Conclude debate for the negative team.Debate Step 6. jpg6Note the three rules of rebuttal. When rebutting a team's argument, remember three essential rules:Offer evidence for your rebuttal. Do not rely on vigorous assertion alone. Show the chairperson why the other team's argument is fundamentally flawed; don't just tell.Attack the most important parts of their argument. It's not very effective if you pick bones with an obscure part of the opponent's argument. Go for the crux of their argument and pick it apart with the ruthless efficiency of a surgeon.No ad hominem attacks. An ad hominem attack is when you criticize another person instead of his or her ideas. Attack the idea, not the person.Debate Step 7. jpg7Use up all your time (or most of it). The more you talk, the more you'll convince the judge. Note that this means you should come up with many examples, not that you should ramble. The more the judge hears about why you are correct, the more inclined s/he will be to believe you.Debate Step 8. jpg8Know what aspects of the debate you will be judged upon, if appropriate. For the most part, the debates are judged on three main areas: matter, manner, and method. [1]Matter:Amount of evidence. How much evidence does the speaker marshall to support his/her claims?Relevancy of evidence. How strongly does the evidence used to support the argument?Manner:Eye contact. How well does the speaker engage his or her audience? Does the speaker spend too much time on his or her cue cards?Voice. How well does the speaker's voice accentuate his or her argument? Does he or she offer a diversity of volume, pitch and speed to highlight important parts?Body language. How well does the speaker use his or her body to emphasize arguments and communicate authority and calmness?Nervous habits. How well does the speaker avoid verbal and bodily tics when he or she speaks? Does the speaker stammer, fidget, or pace?Elocution. How clearly does the speaker pronounce words? Does the speaker use words, or do the words use him or her?Method:Team cohesion. How well does the entire team organize their arguments and rebuttals? How well do the individual arguments mesh together, as well as the rebuttals? How clear and consistent is the team line?Individual prowess. How well does the individual stand out as he or she speaks? How clearly does he or she mark the end of one argument and the beginning of another?Ad Method 2 of 2: Conversational or Informal DebatingDebate Step 9. jpg1Ask questions to gradually reveal an argument. Since you're not engaging in a formal debate, you don't really know what side of the argument the other person is going to take, or what they necessarily believe in. Ask questions to narrow things down."So do you believe that the gap in the fossil record says anything serious about Darwinism?""Do you have an opinion on the question of nature v. nurture?""So what's your position when it comes to affirmative action?"Debate the Step 10. jpg2Clearly understand the other person's position or ask them to clarify any confusing areas. Nobody's Weltanschauung is perfectly coherent. But it's hard to debate someone when they're all over the place. Try to gently get them to adhere to one line of arguments that are more or less consistent.If you're not sure about what their argument is, help them out in a non-threatening way: "So, if I understand what you're saying, you mean that the penny should be abolished because it costs more than a penny to produce a penny?"Step debate 11. jpg3Introduce your counterargument. Introducing your counterargument after the other person has made their argument clear makes things feel less antagonistic, even if it's still a debate.Offer examples along with your thesis for why you hold a particular belief:"Here's what I think: I think an overabundance of political correctness has actually made us afraid to say anything at all. Instead of saying what we actually mean, we say what we think people want to hear. We're more worried about offending other people than we are about telling the truth. "Debate Step 12. jpg4Offer rebuttals to the other person's argument. State your counterargument first, and then offer any rebuttals that you can think of."Does it really make sense to say that any form of government — municipal, state, or federal — should legislate sexual morality? It's not a question of "could" — they're more than capable of doing it; It's more a question of whether it's right for them to say how we should treat our own bodies in the privacy of our own home. Where does it stop if we let them get a foot in the door? Wouldn't that

Kết quả (Anh) 2:

How to Debate
Three Methods: Formal or Informal DebatingSample DebateConversational Team Debates
There are many types of Debates, ranging from British Parliamentary, Asian Debate Format, Policy Debates sparring sessions to regular old backyard. Whether you're in a team or going at it solo, this article will go over some general facts about debating, as well as offer tips on how big you Improve your technique.
Ad Method 1 of 2: Formal Debate Team Debate Step 1. jpg1 Be ready to receive a topic to get to go debate on. One team phải debate the "affirmative" stance, and the other phải debate the "negative" stance. The team agrees with the topic is mà gọi the affirmative, while the team is gọi the negative mà disagrees. Both teams will be seated near the front of the room to speak in chúng - affirmative team (Government) on the left, negative team (Opposition) on the right. The chairperson or Adjudicator will start the debate, and the first speaker will present có speech. The order of the speakers is Generally affirmative, negative, affirmative, negative, and so on. Ad Debate 2.jpg2 Step Define the topic, if cần. Debating "That the death penalty is a just and effective punishment" is already pretty clear lẽ, but what if you're given a topic like "That happiness is a trait coal nobler wisdom?" You might need to offer a definition is before you PROCEED. The affirmative always gets the first and best opportunity to define the topic. The first affirmative shouldnt offer the "person on the street" [1] test: How might, an average person on the street define the topic? Is it reasonable to expect a "normal" person to think of the topic in A Certain Way? The negative team is given an opportunity to refute the definition (otherwise known as challenging the definition) and Offer Their Own, but only if the affirmative's definition is unreasonable or it renders obsolete the negative's position. The first negative speaker refute the affirmative's definition phải if s / he wishes to challenge it. Debate Step 3.jpg3 Write theo của argument designated time limit (Thường 7 minutes). Phụ thuộc what position you Argue, cần follow Certain protocol defining the topic or như Presenting a main argument. Support của opinions / contentions. If you say "I think the death penalty abolished nên," be ready to Prove why this is the best course of action. Use only when the appropriate religion. Things That Are Written speaker in the Bible, Torah, Koran, etc, are not Thường sound to use resources to Prove của argument, as not everyone takes to be the truth những sources. If you do not know it, do not debate it you have no other choice nếu. If you do not know much about the topic, try and come up with some at nhất vague, ambiguous information vì opponents will have a hard của time refuting của contentions. If chúng do not hiểu it, chúng không refute it. Keep in mind rằng lẽ will not judge you so well hoặc hiểu, but thử is lẽ better than Saying, "I know nothing. I give the case to my opponents." Do not use rhetorical questions presented. Always give a clear answer to every question you ask. Leaving open-ended Gives a question của room to refute opponents. Debate Step 4.jpg4 Present của argument. When it is your turn, go ahead and present của argument. Be passionate in your speech-a monotone voice to drift off will cause, People, and chúng unfortunately miss the point of what you're thử drunk. Speak Clearly, Slowly, and loudly. Make eye contact with whomever Decides the winners of the debate. While it's okay to look at your opponents every once in a while, try to direct của argument at the judge. Give a layout argument is before you make của it. That way, ngôn will know what to expect Audience and của judge will not cut you off nếu way you tremble overtime. Debate Step 5.jpg 5 Strike a balance của team's Presenting giữa point (s) and rebutting the opponents' point. Since teams take turns debating, it's always possible The rebuttals to offer you are the first nếu affirmative speaker. Here is a rundown of how cả teams might, Organize có debate strategy: 1st affirmative: Define the topic (optional) and present the team's main line. Outline, in brief, what each affirmative speaker will talk about. Present the first half of the affirmative's argument. 1st negative: Accept or reject the definition (optional) and present the team's main line. Outline, in brief, what each negative speaker will talk about. Offer a rebuttal of vài of the points hiển by the first affirmative. Present the first half of the negative's argument. 2nd affirmative: Reaffirm the affirmative's main line. Offer a rebuttal of vài of the points hiển by the first negative. Present the second half of the affirmative's arguments. 2nd negative: Reaffirm the negative's main line. Offer a rebuttal of vài of the points hiển by the second affirmative. Present the second half of the negative's argument. 3rd affirmative: Reaffirm the affirmative's main line. Offer a rebuttal of any of the còn negative's arguments. Offer a summary of the affirmative's case . Conclude debate for the affirmative team. 3rd negative: Reaffirm the negative's main line. Offer a rebuttal of any of the còn affirmative's arguments. Offer a summary of the negative's case. Conclude debate for the negative team. Debate Step 6.jpg6 Note the three rules of rebuttal. When a team's argument rebutting, remember three essential rules: Offer Evidence for your rebuttal. Do not rely on vigorous assertion alone. Show the chairperson why the other team's argument is fundamentally flawed; do not just tell. Attack the nhất Important parts of chúng argument. It's not very effective if you pick bones with an opponent's Obscure part of the argument. Go for the crux of arguments and pick it apart chúng with the ruthless Efficiency of a surgeon. No ad hominem attacks. An ad hominem attack is khi thay you criticize another person của the her ideas. Attack the idea, not the person. Debate Step 7.jpg7 Use up all your time (or nhất of it). The more you talk, the more you'll convince the judge. Note this means again you shouldnt mà come up with many examples, not that you shouldnt ramble. The more the judge hears about why you are correct, the more inclined s / he will be to believe you. Debate Step 8.jpg8 Know what aspects of the debate you will be judged on, if the appropriate. For the most part, are judged on three main Debates which areas: matter, a manner and method. [1] Matter: Amount of Evidence. How much does the speaker marshall Evidence to support his / her Artist claims? Relevancy of Evidence. How does the Evidence strongly support the argument used? Manner: Eye contact. How well does the speaker Engage Audience của her Artist? Does the speaker spend too much time on her Artist của cue cards? Voice. How well does the speaker's voice accentuate the her của argument? Does he offer a diversity of SHE or volume, pitch and speed to highlight trọng parts? Body language. How well does the speaker use the her body to emphasize của arguments and communicate authority and calmness? Nervous Habits. How well does the speaker avoid verbal tics and Kinetic khi he speaks or SHE? Does the speaker stammer, fidget, or pace? Elocution. How does the speaker Clearly Pronounce words? Does the speaker use words, or by the use words photographing người? Method: Team cohesion. How well does the entire team arguments and rebuttals chúng Organize? How well the individual arguments by the mesh together, as well as the rebuttals? How clear and Consistent Is The team line? Individual prowess. How well does the individual stand out as the he or SHE speaks? How does he or SHE Clearly mark the end of one argument and the beginning of another? Ad Method 2 of 2: Conversational or debating Informal Debate Step 9.jpg1 Ask questions presented to gradually Reveal an argument. Since you're not engaging in a formal debate, you do not really know what side of the argument the other person is going to take, or what chúng necessarily believe in. Ask questions presented to narrow things down. "So do you believe rằng gap in the fossil record says anything serious about Darwinism?" "Do you have an opinion on the question of nature v. nurture?" "So what's your position khi đến to affirmative action? " Debate Step 10.jpg2 Clearly the other person's position hiểu or ask which areas added to Clarify any confusing. Nobody's Weltanschauung is perfectly coherent. But it's hard to debate someone they're all over the khi place. Try to gently get added to adhere to one line of arguments được Consistent more or less. If you're not sure about what có argument is, help out in a non-add threatening way: "So, if I Understand what you ' re Saying, you mean penny nên rằng vì abolished more than a penny it Costs to Produce a penny? " Debate Step 11.jpg3 Introduce của counterargument. Introducing của counterargument after the other person has made ​​có argument clear Makes things feel less antagonistic, dù it's still a debate. Offer examples along with your Flickr thesis for why you hold một Belief: "Here's what I think: I think overabundance of Political Actually correctness has made ​​us afraid to say anything at all. Instead of Saying of what we mean Actually, what we think người drunk chúng want to hear. We're more worried about offending than we are about Other People telling the truth. " Debate Step 12.jpg4 Offer rebuttals to the other person's argument. State của counterargument first, and then offer any rebuttals mà can think of. "Does it really make sense to say mà any form of government requirements - municipal, state, or federal - shouldnt legislate sexual morality? It's not a question of" could " - they're more coal capable of doing it; it's more a question of nếu it's right for added to say How We shouldnt treat our own bodies in the privacy of our own home. Where does it stop if chúng Let Them get a foot print the door? Would not that