Transcript What is Debate?

What is Debate?
A debater’s guide to the
argumentative universe…
How do we define debate?
Debate is:
An academic game
You need to know the rules
A rhetorical contest
Communication is essential
A strategic contest
The best placed argument and/or evidence will
often rule the day…
Our two flavors of Debate
Policy Debate:
 Comparison of policy systems
 two-on-two debate
 affirmative or negative position based
on a set resolution
 focus on research, policy analysis, and
point-by-point refutation
Lincoln-Douglas Debate
Comparison of value systems
 one-on-one debate
 focus on persuasion, logic,
spontaneous analysis…
 the “big idea” debate
Policy Debate Structure
 1AC - 8 minutes
 C-X - 3 minutes (2N asks, 1A answers)
 1NC - 8 minutes
 C-X - 3 minutes (1A asks, 1N answers)
 2AC - 8 minutes
 C-X - 3 minutes (1N asks, 2A answers)
 2NC – 8 minutes
 C-X - 3 minutes (2A asks, 2N answers)
 1NR - 5 minutes
 1AR - 5 minutes
 2NR - 5 minutes
 2AR - 5 minutes
Lincoln-Douglas Structure
AC - 6 minutes
C-X - 3 minutes
NC - 7 minutes
C-X - 3 minutes
1AR - 4 minutes
NR - 6 minutes
2AR - 3 minutes
Application Exercise
Application Exercise 1.1
Prepare an oral argument that establishes a definition of
debate. Include the term you are defining (“debate”), the
exact definition, evidentiary and/or logical support for your
definition, and at least two reasons that this definition is
superior to other alternative definitions. Present your
argument orally in less than 2 minutes.
Definition of debate:
Evidentiary support:
Reasons that this definition is superior:
2010 - 2011 Policy Debate
Topics
Resolved:
The abuse of illegal drugs ought to be treated as a
matter of public health, not of criminal justice.
Resolved:
The United States federal government should
substantially reduce its military and/or police
presence in Afghanistan & Iraq.
Initial Affirmative Burden
 It is the obligation of the affirmative to
define the terms in the resolution…
 Common sense definitions will work, but
official defs are best.
The Affirmative Burden
Establish a Prima Facie case:
Need: Establish a SIGNIFICANT reason to
adopt the resolution.
 Clearly point out the need for a new system…
 Establish an INHERENT barrier to the adoption of
the resolution…what the status quo cannot meet.
Plan: Provide a WORKABLE alternative to the
present system.
Benefits: provide a plan that is free from relative
DISADVANTAGES…and produces obvious
and significant benefits.
1AC & 2AC Responsibilities
1AC:
 State your team’s support for the resolution
 Define key terms
 Establish the Need to adopt the resolution
2AC:
 Reaffirm support for the Resolution
 Outline the Affirmative Team’s Plan
 State the Benefits of the Aff. Plan
 Allot time to rebut 1NC arguments against 1AC
Obligations of the Negative
 Goal: To counter the Affirmative’s Prima
Facie case…




The Affirmative lacks SIGNIFICANCE, or
The Affirmative lacks INHERENCY, or
The Affirmative plan is not WORKABLE, or
The Affirmative plan contains SIGNIFICANT
disadvantages.
 The Negative Team must be prepared to defend
the Status Quo.
 The SQ doesn’t have to be perfect, and minor “repairs”
are allowed
First Negative Constructive
1NC
Time allotted: 8 minutes
 The First Negative Constructive (1NC) is used
to make specific arguments against the
Affirmative case.
 These are called Case Arguments
 Focus on:
Disadvantages
 Topicality
- Critiques (inherent flaws)
- Counter-plan
 1NC needs to raise doubts in the judge’s mind
that the Affirmative team has me (or is meeting)
their burden)
2NC Responsibilities
2NC:
 Reaffirm 1NC position that the Aff. has not
bet the Burden of Proof
 Rebut 2AC Plan and Benefits
 If time, circle back and support 1AC Case
Arguments
Cross Examination
Goals of Cross-Ex:
 Expose contradictions
 Do not allow for extended responses
 Paraphrase responses to help set the trap
Break the Causal Chain
 If you remove an argument from A+B+C = D, then the
argument is not valid
 Expose gaps in evidence and claims.
 Identify missing refutations
 A good tactic for pointing out to the judge that your
opponent has not proved your case unworthy
Don’t forget the Zen…
 Be courteous
 Use your opponent’s name
 Don’t lose your cool
 Respond to questions briefly and to
the point. Don’t ramble…
 Stay focused