debate technicality of australasian parliamentary system

15

Upload: albin

Post on 21-Jan-2016

52 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM. debate is all about arguing between affirmative/government team and negative/opposition team upon a motion. Affirmative support the motion Negative  deny the motion. MOTION. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM
Page 2: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

debate is all about arguing between affirmative/government team and negative/opposition team upon a motion.

• Affirmative support the motion

• Negative deny the motion

Page 3: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

MOTION

MOTION is the topic to be debated. It should be debatable and impartial.

(THBT=This House Believes That…)

TH would legalize gambling

TH would support euthanasia

THBT we should be free from terrorists

Page 4: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

THE ORDER OF SPEAKERS The first affirmative 7 minutes The first negative 7 minutes The second affirmative 7 minutes The second negative 7 minutes The third affirmative 7 minutes The third negative 7 minutes The negative reply 5 minutes The affirmative reply 5 minutes

Page 5: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

ROLE OF SPEAKERSROLE OF SPEAKERS

1st speaker of affirmative background, definition, theme line, team split, argument, sum-up.

1st speaker of negative Accept or refuse the affirmative’s definition, background, TL, TS, rebuttal, argument, sum-up.

2nd speaker of affirmative

2nd speaker of negative

3rd speaker of affirmative

3rd speaker of negative

Rebut, rebuild, bulk of case, sum-up

Rebut, rebuild, sum-up

Page 6: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

FLOW OF SPEAKERS

AFFIRMATIVE

1st Speaker

2nd Speaker

3rd Speaker

Reply Speaker

NEGATIVE

1st Speaker

2nd Speaker

3rd Speaker

Reply Speaker

Page 7: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

FURTHER EXPLANATION

BACKGROUND to establish framework.

DEFINITION

straight motion to be debated literally, current issue. TH Would Enhance GM Crops.

linkable motion not to be debated literally. That militaristic flavor is needed to promote stability.

Page 8: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

THEME LINE

Theme line is the underlying reason which answers the big question “WHY” one side of the house supports or opposes a motion. Theme line is what a team needs to prove, or the so-called burden of proof. It is also the main reason why a team attacks the opponent’s case.

Page 9: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

TEAM SPLIT

A set of arguments is called a case. It is very impossible to deliver the whole arguments by only a speaker, thus, those arguments should be distributed fairly to the first and second speaker. This is aimed to avoid overlapping job of carrying out particular arguments. It is more preferable to state the team split explicitly.

Page 10: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

ARGUMENT / SPLIT Argument is the fragment of thought to support the theme

line. They are usually abbreviated as AREL. ASSERTION Assertion is a statement which shows

one’s stance. REASONING Reasoning is the way of explaining and

elaborating assertion to be comprehensible and logical. EXAMPLES People will not that easily believe in

something unless there is fact or data prove it. Therefore, proof, evidence, example and data are very significance in upholding an argument.

LINK BACK An argument sometimes can go nowhere if it is not known what its relevance with the theme line is. Link back to theme line can bridge the long way from argument and theme line itself.

Page 11: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

REBUTTAL To win a debate, debaters not only need to build a

strong case but they also have to attack their opponent’s arguments and provide strong defense from any attacks.

Global Rebuttal: It is an attack against the main core of the opponent’s case, the theme line.

Detailed Rebuttal: It is an attack towards each argument or example. It will not deteriorate the whole case, but at least mess up the opponent’s image.

A case is a forest, it is more effective to focus on the forest as a whole rather than the trees. To be remembered, the trees, however, are the elements of the forest.

Page 12: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

Rebuild own’s case Case Enhancement is the part of reply

speech showing how important the proposal is. For negative, it can show how essential the denial is. Enhancing the case means talking about our own case but in a different way. It can be in the form of a story, analogy or joke. The aim is to give a clearer description to the audience.

Comparison In showing how good one’s case is and how bad the opposition may have can be accomplished by comparing both cases.

Page 13: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

Definitional Challenge (DC)Definitional Challenge is done unless the

affirmative provides a definition which violates the principle of defining, that is avoiding truism, tautology, squirreling, and time and place setting.

Reject the affirmative’s definition. Provide a new definition and a set of

new case. Rebut with even-if rebuttals. Repetition of definition.

Page 14: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

SPEAKER STYLE Language. Fluency and clarity in speaking help debater

transferring what he believes to his audience. It is not as simple as what it looks like because there are many things to consider, such as how to make our speech comprehensible. (spontaneity, loudness, etc)

Eye Contact Gesture / Paralanguage Stance Humor

Page 15: DEBATE TECHNICALITY OF AUSTRALASIAN PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

The nature of debate – changing and dynamic – a debater should up date himself by accessing any kinds of information.

www.debate.uvm.eduwww.debatabase.orghttp://www.geocities.com/nyuparli/novice_edwww.debating.net