DEBATE

DEBATE• Formal type of argumentation

• Intelligent exchange of points between the affirmative and negative sides

TYPES OF DEBATEThere are four types of debates that are most

commonly used. These are as follows:

Lincoln- Douglas- is a kind of debate where there is only one speaker in the side of the affirmative as well as in the side of the affirmative side opens the debate then followed by the negative speaker.

THE REBUTTAL DEBATE

-is a kind of debate where each team from the affirmative and the negative side is composed of about two or three members. As the debate starts, the affirmative speaker opens the constructive speech and the negative speaker starts the rebuttal. Every speaker is allowed to deliver a rebuttal speech. The debate is closed with the affirmative side delivering the last rebuttal.

ONE REBUTTAL TYPE OF DEBATE

is considered as a modified form of the Lincoln-Douglas type of debate. However in this type of debate, there are about two to three members in both the affirmative and the negative side. In this debate, all of the speakers have a chance to refute the argument of the opponent with the exception of the first affirmative speaker who is given the opportunity to close the debate in his or her rebuttal speech.

OREGON-OXFORD DEBATE tradit ional debate format used in elementary,

governors debate, house debate rules, parliamentary debate rules, high school debate, youtube debate, presidential debate, colleges and all over the country.

There are 2 sides in this format : the Aff irmative and the Negative. The Aff irmative proves the validity of the issue or topic called the Proposit ion while the Negative disproves it . Each team has two speakers and one scribe. A Debate Moderator enforces the rules to ensure the debate’s smooth conduct.

FLOW OF OREGON OFXORD DEBATE

THREE SPEAKERS FROM EACH SIDE

1st speaker affirmative side constructive speech 5 minutes1st speaker negative side interpolation 3 minutes1st speaker negative side constructive speech 5 minutes1st speaker affirmative side interpolation 3 minutes2nd speaker affirmative side constructive speech 5 minutes2nd speaker negative side interpolation 3 minutes2nd speaker negative side constructive speech 5 minute2nd speaker affirmative side interpolation 3 minutes3rd speaker affirmative side constructive speech 5 minutes3rd speaker negative side interpolation 3 minutes3rd speaker negative side constructive speech 5 minutes3rd speaker affirmative side interpolation 3 minute5-minute breakspeaker negative side rebuttal 5 minutesspeaker affirmative side rebuttal 5 minutes

In debate

Proposition

Proposition

Topic or issue that is

argued upon

In exploring

Do some ORGANIZED research!

Utilize the library-it’s the first source

Do some interview

s

Take down notes!

Refer to the web

Parts of an argument

You should arouse the attention of your audience.

REMEMBER!

Make them see that the topic is

important.

How?

Show them that the topic is

timely.

How?

Preserve a favorable attitude.

How?

Second aim of intro is to

explain the proposition.

REMEMBER!

Define all important

words. (1st A)

How?

Set the parameters/ limit of the

debate (1st A)

How?

The whole idea must be clearly

explained.

How?

Present a short but lively

history of the topic.

How?

Third aim of intro is to state the ISSUES.

REMEMBER!

ISSUES are the questions that

when answered, may destroy a

side.

UNDERSTAND

ISSUES are the questions that

when answered, may destroy a

side.

UNDERSTAND

TEST FOR ISSUES Resolved that the K+12 be

implemented in the Philippine Educational System . (PROPOSITION)• How would the proposition

affect the Philippine Educational System? The

students?

TEST FOR ISSUES Resolved that the K+12 be

implemented in the Philippine Educational System. (PROPOSITION)

• Is there really a need to implement

the proposition?

Parts of an argument

OPPOSING SIDES

AFFIRMATIVE

negative

Aspects of the debatE(+)

Aspects of the debatE(-)

NECESSITY

beneficiality

practicability

PARTS of the debatE(+)

Constructive speech presentation of

each team member’s

arguments and evidence for each aspect of the case

Interpellation The opportunity for

the opposing debater to ask

questions regarding the speech of the

speaker

Rebuttal The summary and

defense of each team’s arguments

and evidence, to be delivered by the

team captain

Speaker roles 1A speaker-

NECESSITY 1N speaker-NON

NECESSITY

Speaker roles 2A speaker-

BENEFICIALITY 2N speaker-NON

BENEFICIALITY

Speaker roles 3A speaker-

PRACTICABILITY 3N speaker-NON

PRACTICABILITY

FALLACIES IN DEBATE

Fallacy refers to an incorrect argument which results in invalid or unsound statements.

There are different kinds of fallacies but below are the commonly encountered fallacies in any argumentation.

FALLACIES IN DEBATE

AD HOMINEM- is the fallacy committed when one party attacks the character of the other party for the purpose of making the argument of that other party weak.

EXAMPLE: I cannot accept the argument of Capt. Juan Dela Cruz to implement zero alcohol policy on board since he himself is an alcoholic.

POST HOC Is the fallacy committed when one party

considers the fact or situation that occurred before as the cause of the occurence of another situation without significant basis.

EXAMPLE: I believe that this technical problem occured due to our newly-embarked master. I am certain, for this problem only occured two days after his embarkmention. He is probably a bad luck.

AD POPULUM is the fallacy committed when one

party attempts to win an argument by citing that most or a lot of people believe in a certain position, as in bandwagon fallacy.

EXAMPLE: Everybody is drinking on board. I should join them.

AD MISERICORDIAM

• i s the fa l lacy commit ted when one party use s an argument that appeal s to pi ty or re la ted emot ion in order to convince and thus in f luence the other party to give into wil l o f the former.

AD MISERICORDIAM EXAMPLE: I believe we should give him a chance. I know the problem occurred out of negligence. Yet we need to consider his goodness. He has been with us for several months and he has been so good to us. He has been helpful to us somehow. What wil l happen to him if we wil l recommend him for repatriation? Anyway, nobody was hurt in that incident.

AD BACULUM• is the fallacy committed when one

party uses threat to invoke fear in the other party and thus persuade the other party to accept the will of the former. However, the threatening argument used is not directly related to the main issue at hand.

AD BACULUM • I know I violated our code of

ethics. Yet you need to give me a chance. Otherwise, I will inform the company about your anomalous activities here onboard.