Reported Post by Finn

Finn · Jul 6, 2012

Finn has reported a post.

Reason:

Reporting again because this will be the last straw for the few remaining good posters in SFA. The thread is a joke.
Click to expand...

Post: TheNinja209's General Debating Thread { Debating only Please no Spam}
Forum: Something For All
Assigned Moderators: sypherz, malakadang, They be trippin

Posted by: TheNinja209
Original Content:
Hi and Welcome to my General Debating Thread

General Rules of Debating:

Avoid the use of Never.
Avoid the use of Always.
Refrain from saying you are wrong.
You can say your idea is mistaken.
Don't disagree with obvious truths.
Attack the idea not the person.
Use many rather than most.
Avoid exaggeration.
Use some rather than many.
The use of often allows for exceptions.
The use of generally allows for exceptions.
Quote sources and numbers.
If it is just an opinion, admit it.
Do not present opinion as facts.
Smile when disagreeing.
Stress the positive.
You do not need to win every battle to win the war.
Concede minor or trivial points.
Avoid bickering, quarreling, and wrangling.
Watch your tone of voice.
Don't win a debate and lose a friend.
Keep your perspective - You're just debating.
Click to expand...

You need to be very polite when disagreeing with someone in English, even someone you know quite well.
With someone you know very well, you can disagree more directly.

How to Debate, Some tips from ME !

1. Study previous debates. That being said, don't steal the contentions made in that debate word-for-word. There's nothing more enlightening than watching others debate and listening to their style of speaking, strategies, etc.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. Know when you are and are not allowed to add a point to your support what you are arguing for

5. he more you talk, the more you'll convince me. Note that this means you should come up with many examples, not that you should ramble. The more I hears about why you are correct, the more inclined I am to believe you.

6. Realize that no matter how analytical and academic a debate is, the way you present it verbally, will have an effect on your adjudicator. There is a little bit of drama involved. For example, if the topic is comical (which they never usually are) then generally one should put on a happy act, and adopt a really cheerful voice. So match the 'mood' in which you are speaking with the topic you are arguing about.

7. Don't give up if you are feeling mortified with the argument you just presented. It is not over until the conclusion has been stated, and state it loudly and confidently! Even if the back-up was not-so-spectacular, this is the opinion you are expressing. Give a large smile, say something along the lines of 'We hope we convinced you', and bid them a hearty goodbye.
Learn the art and history of Rhetoric. Socrates the great Philosopher was a famous rhetorician, and won his arguments by letting his opponents contradict themselves with their own words. Therefore listen hard to your opponents' speeches.
Speaking passionately is a great advantage.
Revise your synonyms. It gets tiresome when speakers use the words 'misconception', 'contradictory', and 'flaws' during their rebuttal. Be creative! Words like 'misapprehended', 'inconsistency', 'indistinct', 'misinterpreted', are not so clichÃ©.
Practice speaking your debate in front of your friends, parents, or anyone willing to listen. If practised in front of the mirror, you can analyse your facial expression and hand gestures.
The #1 most important factor is to relax.
Cue-cards are easier to shuffle when they are in little squares. Long rectangular ones tend to slip from peoples' hands.
Adjudicators don't like it when a person doesn't tell them what they are going to talk about for the next three minutes. At least briefly explain what main issues you will raise in your speech.
Say what you're going to say, say it, and then finally say what you've just said.
Label your arguments using S.P.E.R.M. (Social, Political, Economic, Religious and Moral) This makes it easier to keep track of your arguments and to structure your speech.
State your argument - Explain your argument - Illustrate your argument
Click to expand...

When Replying to Others or Stating something. Please Use this guide:

If debating The Affirmative Please state (Affirmative at the top of your post)

If debating the Affirmative you Must:

The 1st Affirmative:

- define the topic.

- present the affirmative's team line.

- outline briefly what each speaker in their team will talk about.

- present the first half of the affirmative case.

When Replying to the 1st Negative:

- accept or reject the definition. If you don't do this it is assumed that you accept the definition.

- present the negative team line.

- outline briefly what each of the negative speakers will say.

- rebut a few of the main points of the first affirmative speaker.

- the 1st negative should spend about one quarter of their time rebutting.

- present the first half of the negative team's case.

2nd affirmative must:

- reaffirm the affimative's team line.

- rebut the main points presented by the 1st negative.

- the 2nd affirmative should spend about one third of their time rebutting.

- present the second half of the affirmative's case.

2nd negative must:

- reaffirm the negative's team line.

- rebut some of the main points of the affirmative's case.

- the 2nd negative should spend about one third of their time rebutting.

- present the second half of the negative's case.

3rd affirmative must:

- reaffirm the affirmative's team line.

- rebut all the remaining points of the negative's case.

- the 3rd affirmative should spend about two thirds to three quarters of their time rebutting.

- present a summary of the affirmative's case.

- round off the debate for the affirmative.

3rd negative must:

- reaffirm the negative's team line.

- rebut all the remaining points of the affirmative's case.

- the 3rd negative should spend about two thirds to three quarters of their time rebutting.

- present a summary of the negative's case.

- round off the debate for the negative.

Neither third speaker may introduce any new parts of their team's cases.

Concept:

Matter is what you say, it is the substance of your speech. You should divide your matter into arguments and examples.

An argument is a statement "The topic is true (or false depending on which side you are on) because of x", where the argument fills in for the x . For example in the topic "That the zoos should be closed" an argument may be: "the zoos should be closed because they confine the animals in an unnatural environment".

An example is a fact or piece of evidence which supports an argument. If our argument is: "that zoos should be closed because they confine the animals in an unnatural environment" then an example might be: "that in the lion cage at Taronga Park Zoo in Sydney the animals only have about 200 square metres where in the wild they would have 2000 square kilometres to roam in.".

Any examples that you use should be relevant to the topic at hand. Examples which have very little or nothing to do with the topic only make a speech look weak and lacking substance.

Matter cannot be just a long list of examples. You do not win a debate by creating the biggest pile of facts. Facts are like bricks in a wall, if you don't use them, cement them together properly then they are useless. Similarly you cannot win a debate solely by proving that some of the facts of the opposition are wrong. It may weaken their case a little, the same way that removing some of the bricks from a wall will, but you really need to attack the main arguments that the other side presents to bring the whole wall crashing down.

Many debates are on currently important issues so it is good for any debater to keep themselves informed of what is happening in the world around them and what are the issues involved. Watching the news helps (but watch a credible broadcast like the ABC , you are hardly likely to get a topic on some heartwarming story about a lost cat in western Sydney) as does reading a good paper or periodical like the Canberra Times or the Sydney Morning Herald.

Concept Method:

Where matter is what you say method is how you organise what you say. There are many delicious pieces of the method pie; here are a few tantalising crumbs.......

1. TEAM. Good team method involves unity and logic. Unity is created by all members being aware of the definition, what the other speakers have said and what the team line is. Each member of the team needs to reinforce the team line and be consistent with what has already been said and what will be said by the other members of their team. You may as well shoot yourself in the foot as change the team line mid debate just because you think it isn't working. Your team will look poorly organised and will be severely penalised by the adjudicator.

2. INDIVIDUAL. You must structure your own speech well. The first step is to have a clear idea of your own arguments and which examples you will be using to support those arguments. As you speak make a clear division between arguments and let the audience know when you are moving from one argument to the next, this is called sign posting and is a very important debating tool. The key thing to remember is that although you know exactly what you are saying the audience has never heard it before and will only hear it once so you have to be very clear about it.

When you are presenting one particular argument make sure that the argument is logical (makes sense) and that you make clear links between your team line and the argument, and between the argument and the examples that you will use to support it.

Rebuttal should be organised the same way. Attack each argument that the opposition presents in turn. Spend a little while on each and then move on to the next. That way the other team's case is completely demolished.

Also organise your speech well in terms of time. Adjudicators can pick up when you are waffling just to fill in time .... and can see when you've spent too long on one point and then have to rush through all your other points and rebuttal just to finish your speech in time. Whew!! You will probably make a few mistakes with this early on but practice makes perfect.

We will be completing these kinds of Debates Please Read:

Team Policy Debate

Team policy debate is the oldest, and still probably the most popular, format of debate practiced in American high schools. The proposition side is called the Affirmative or Aff, and the opposition side is called the Negative or Neg. Each side is a team composed of two debaters, so that there are four people participating in the debate (not including the judge and audience).
Format. A round of team policy debate consists of eight speeches. The first four speeches are called constructive speeches, because the teams are perceived as laying out their most important arguments during these speeches. The last four speeches are called rebuttals, because the teams are expected to extend and apply arguments that have already been made, rather than make new arguments. Here is a table of the eight speeches and their time limits:

Speech: 1AC 1NC 2AC 2NC 1NR 1AR 2NR 2AR

(A stands for Affirmative, N for Negative, C for Constructive, R for Rebuttal.)

Two things are of interest in this structure. First, the affirmative team both begins and ends the debate. Second, the negative team has two speeches in a row: the first negative rebuttal (1NR) immediately follows the second negative constructive (2NC). (Why? Well, because it's always been done that way.)

In general, the members of each team alternate giving speeches, so that the same person gives both the 1AC and the 1AR, the same person gives the 2NC and the 2NR, etc. Occasionally, the rules will allow a change in this format. For example, affirmative teams will sometimes go "inside-outside" so that one person (usually the weaker member) gives the 1AC and the 2AR, while the other (stronger) debater gives the 2AC and the 1AR.

Usually, there is a 3-minute cross-examination period after each of the first four (constructive) speeches. The person who does the cross-examining is the person who will not be giving the next speech for his side. For instance, the person who will give the 2NC will cross-examine after the 1AC. (An exception to this rule is made when the affirmative team goes "inside-outside.") When team policy debate is done without cross-examination periods, the speech times are often extended to 10 minutes for constructives and 5 minutes for rebuttals.

Resolutions. Resolutions in team policy debate are always of a policy nature, usually governmental policy. The affirmative team almost always defends the resolution by means of a particular example, known as a "case"; if they can show the example (case) to be true, then the general proposition is also shown to be true. For instance, the first resolution I ever encountered in team policy debate was, "The federal government should adopt a comprehensive, long-term agricultural policy in the United States." Some typical cases teams ran under this resolution were: that the government should institute a program restricting the use of pesticides; that the government should institute a program to insure genetic diversity of crops; that the government should institute a program requiring farmers to switch from land-farming to hydroponics (i.e., growing food in great big tanks of water); that the government should abolish crop subsidies and price supports; etc.

Style. Team policy debate is focused on evidence gathering and organizational ability. Persuasiveness is not considered important -- or at least, not as important as covering ground and reading plenty of evidence. The best teams have huge fileboxes packed to the gills with evidence on their own affirmative case and all the possible cases they might have to oppose. If you ever walk into a high-level team debate round, expect to see debaters talking at extremely high speeds, reading out the contents of page after page of evidence, gasping for breath between points, and using lots of jargon ("I cite Jorgenson, Jorgenson post-dates Bronstein, that kills PMR 4, flow that Aff!"). There is very little discussion of values such as freedom, justice, equality, etc.; usually, the ultimate criterion on any issue is how many dead bodies will result from taking or not taking a particular action. This form of debate can be fun, it encourages good research and organizational skills, and it is good for getting novice debaters used to speaking in front of people. But if you want to learn how to speak persuasively, this form of debate is not for you.

When Replying Please Center Either of these which you are speaking on:

1st Affirmative
1st Negative
2nd Affirmative
2nd Negative
3rd Affirmative
3rd Negative

Before Posting Please Get a team Partner any other sythe Member

Fill this out Before Posting
Code:
Your sythe Name:
Partners Sythe Name:
Affirmative or Negative:
Code:
All Applicants will Be listed Here With there partner
And the topic They will be Debating.

1st Team Vs 2nd Team
Topic Being Debated:
Role:

Currently Taking 2 Teams:

Other Teams will be placed on the waiting list for the next debate

Team 1. 
Team 2. 

Reserved List:

Team:
Team:
Team:
Team:
All Debates will be updated Daily
Whenever the Debate has come to an end The Sythe Community Will Complete Voted for The Winner.

Prizes will be Handled by me.

Prizes are Free From Me: Could Range From

20m RSGP
Free Runescape Upgrades
MSP
Free 1m Exp Runescape Skilling (any Skill)

There will only be 2 Teams Debating at once. So there is one specific topic and 1 specific debate. Althought feel free to input sources for each team wile the debate is ongoing. Thank you Keep in mind im the Only One handling this post. So bare with me.
Code:
Teams Applied:
Debates Final Grade will be Graded Accordingly:

All Points will be looked over by me if the voter cannot provide sufficient evidence as to why he/she voted for you the point will not count. I will be as accurate as possible

Graded out of 15 Sythe Members: 1 Point Per Member
(you may not vote Twice)

Team Name:
Why did you choose them:

Seek Enlightenment Inspired By : Mahatma Gandhi
Click to expand...

djweasel · Jul 6, 2012

Closed.

Log in or Sign up

Reported Post by Finn

Finn Hero

djweasel Legend

Log in or Sign up

Reported Post by Finn

Thread Tools

Finn Hero

djweasel Legend