introduction to 3-on-3 debating

www.monashdebaters.com | [email protected]

Introduction to 3-on-3 Debating

Victor Finkel


Outline

1. Why debate?2. What is debate?3. Matter/Manner/Method4. How to prepare a case5. Adjudication6. Hot tips


Why Debate?a. Because debate is fun

b. Because debate is useful

c. Because you get to travel the world, meet new people and kick

their butts!


Debate is structured argument


Why do we do it?

“US launches predator strikes in Pakistan”

“US to sell Uranium to India”

“Gay marriage bill vetoed”

“Cap on CEO pay strives to end era of excess”

“GLOBAL WARMING IS OVERRATED”

“You should totally sleep with me for 3 reasons; First…”


What is Debate?

Ah hah


Debate - an overview

• Assigned topic and side• Understand context• Identify problem• Propose solution• Convince everyone whyit’s right! “I found the old format

much more exciting”


3-on-3 Debate: the

format

1st Aff

3rd Neg

2nd Neg

1st Neg

3rd Aff

2nd Aff

AFFIRMATIVE NEGATIVE30 minute

prep

6-8 minutespeeches


MATTER, MANNER and METHOD

The elements that contribute to

persuasiveness in debates


What you say“Arguments”

MATTER


Elements of an argument

• Say it, Explain it, Illustrate it

• Or..• IDEA, ANALYSIS, EVIDENCE• These are the elements of an argument

• Does it help you prove your case?


LOGIC and RELEVANCE

• Why is it true? • Who Cares?


Rebuttal

• Same elements are true for building arguments and destroying them.

• Targeting the Idea > Analaysis > Evidence


MANNER

Fundamentals- Language- Vocal Style- Body Language

Key is to be Credible > It’s OK to fake it

Natural Style is GOOD


Body Language

• Eye Contact• Images of people


METHOD

• How you present your case• Enable Audience to understand, follow and REMEMBER what you have said

• Introduce, Analyse, Conclude• Rule of 3s - 3 arguments, 3 questions, 3 times, etc


Arg 1 Arg 2 Arg 3

Speech


Speaker Roles

1st Affirmative• Context• Definition • Team Line• Team Split • Arguments (5 - 6 minutes)

1st Negative• Definition Issues

• Team Line (1 min)

• Rebut (3 mins)• Team Split • Arguments (4 mins)

ROLE: Establish the grounds on which the debate will be fought


2nd Affirmative• Summarise debate so far

• Rebut (3 mins)• Personal Split• Arguments (4 mins)

2nd Negative• Summarise debate so far

• Rebut (3 mins)• Personal Split• Arguments (4 mins)

ROLE: Move the debate forward by devoping analysis of existing arguments and introducing new lines of argument


3rd Affirmative• Intro - biggest point

• Rebut (7 mins)• Summarise and Conclude

• New Argument (Optional but not encouraged)

3rd Negative• Intro - biggest point

• Rebut (7 mins)• Summarise and Conclude

ROLE: Organise the debate into clear questions/themes to make understanding it easier - then show why you won all of them! “Thematic Rebuttal”


Secret Topic, 30 minutes ARGHH! NO 1 Rule - DON’T

PANIC! You know more than you think

Key is to structure the time you have

Choice of 3 topics Mutual Preference System


Choice of Topics: Example

That all you need is loveThat China should float the

YuanThat trees should have the same legal rights as animals

1

3

2

3

2

1

Team of Arts students Team of Eco. students


Timeline for Prep

Activity Time Who

Brainstorm arguments

10 minutes Individually, then together

Prioritise arguments, build case and split

10 minutes together

Flesh out arguments

10 minutes Individually, with 3rd speaker help

Brainstorm opposition case

Walking to the debate!

together


My Rebuttal (at 1st or

2nd)Them• Smoking kills

– Studies show death rate

My Response-> If people want to die, it’s their choice

-> Studies flawed


Constructive Arguments

Giving arms to Afghani Tribal Militias will undermine Al Qaeda's power in the hills

1. Pashtun tribes have self-intereset at heart -> will follow whoever presents the most benefit. By providing weapons, we become the ally of choice.

1. E.g. Under Soviet Union, were very happy to engage with the most powerful

2. Without weapons to defend themselves they are blackmailed by Al Qaeda

1. E.g. Al Qaeda has taken sons of tribal leaders hostage2. E.g. One tribe that resisted Al Qaeda initially was made an

example of - Suicide bombers exploded in a family wedding killing dozens

3. By providing weapons, Militias will be both able to defend themselves and will be motivated to align with west


Adjudication

• Winning team decided by one or panel of adjudicators, deciding independently

• Cannot award a draw• Score range for a speech is 70-80

• Provide constructive feedback

• Adjudication is the best way to learn

• 80: phenomenal (me)• 79: outstanding • 78: excellent • 77: very good • 76: above average• 75: average speech• 74: almost there! (amit)• 73: room to improve! • 72: lots of room to improve!

• 71: lots and lots of room to improve!


TournamentsSEMESTER 1 (3-on-3)• Freshers (MAD)

– For virgin IV debaters• Easters (Brisbane)

– The National novice comp• President’s Cup (Melbourne)

– Debate with fun people• Sorensen (MAD)

– Major 3-on-3 comp, novice rule

• ADAM (Melbourne)– Pre-Australs and great

practice• AUSTRALS @ MONASH

– MAD’s favourite IV

SEMESTER 2 (British Parliamentary)

• Pro-Am Comp• Open BP Comp• Freehills• Women’s (Sydney?)• ANU Mini (Canberra)• Sydney Mini (Sydney)• Vic Mini (New Zealand)• Melbourne Mini

(Melbourne)• WUPID (Malaysia)• WORLDS (Turkey)


Hot Tips

• Don’t write out Speeches word for word!– You’ll remember to say “Good Evening”

without writing it for yourself

• Consider writing manner cues for yourself

• Try and keep a summary of feedback from your adjudicators - quickest way to learn

• Everyone will be learning; uni is a great equalizer

• Have fun!


Definitions

• Interpreting the topic into a debate• Define the meaning, not the words• Show why the meaning is linked to the words

• In 3-on-3, definitions are usually clearly stated by the topic

• Context is the best way to go• BE FAIR• Winning by definition doesn’t work


“That google has gone too far”

Sometimes, topics are not clear


Unreasonable Definitions

• No logical link• Place/Time Set• Truistic


Definitional Challenges

• NEVER DO IT• But if you have to, do it, and do it at the start of your first speech

• Explain Why– State why unreasonable - e.g. no link– Explain this - what the ARP would think

– Propose an alternative, REASONABLE def– Rebut EVEN IF


Models

• Sometimes a debate needs an explanation of how it will work

• Set up as part of the definition

• Details cannot emerge later• E.g. Withdrawl from Iraq

introduction to 3-on-3 debating

Documents