Debate

From Freepedia

Debate, also Debating outside the USA and Canada, is a formalized system of (usually) logical argument. Rules governing debate allow groups and individuals to discuss and decide issues and differences. Debate is a common process in deliberative bodies such as parliaments, legislative assemblies, and meetings of all sorts. Outcomes of debates may be decided by voting, by judges, or by combination of both.

Formal debates between candidates for elected office such as the leaders debates and the U.S. presidential election debates are common in democracies.

In the United States, meetings which may involve large group debates are frequently run according to Roberts Rules of Order.

Competitive Debate is a competition most commonly engaged in at the high school and college level. It is a rule-governed contest with two sides, usually presided by a number of judges. Each side is attempting to win the approval of a designated audience, such as the judges. Competitive Debate is a highly organized activity with teams such as the Oxford Union at the local, national, and international level.

Contents

Competitive Debate in education

Competitive debate is popular in English-speaking universities and high schools around the world, most notably in North America, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and Asia. Many different styles of debate occur under a variety of organizations and rules.

Parliamentary Debate

Main article: Parliamentary debate

Parliamentary debate (sometimes referred to as "Parli") is conducted under rules derived from British parliamentary procedure. It features the competition of individuals in a multi-person setting. It borrows terms such as "government" and "opposition" from the British parliament. It is commonly used in Canada.

Throughout the world, parliamentary debate is what most countries know as "debating", and is the primary style practiced in the United Kingdom, Australia, India and most other nations. The premier event in the world of debate, the World Universities Debating Championship, is conducted in the British Parliamentary style.

In the U.S. the American Parliamentary Debate Association (APDA) is the oldest national parliamentary debating organization, based on the east coast and including all of the Ivy League, although the more recently founded National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA) is now the largest collegiate sponsor. The National Parliamentary Debate League (NPDL) is the umbrella organization for all debating at the secondary school level in the United States. And in Canada, the Canadian Universities Society for Intercollegiate Debating (CUSID) is the umbrella organization for all university-level debating.

British Parliamentary Debate

This style of parliamentary debating is used in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Europe and Africa and for the World Universities Debating Championship. Speeches are 7 min in length at Worlds and some other competitions, but frequently 5 minutes in length - in either case, the first and last minute of each speech is "protected" time in which the speaker may not be interrupted by points of information. Four teams (two on each side) use the following positions:

  • Opening Government:
    • Prime Minister or First Government member and
    • Deputy Prime Minister or Second Government member;
  • Opening Opposition:
    • Leader of the Opposition or First Opposition member and
    • Deputy Leader of the Opposition or "Second Opposition member;
  • Closing Government:
    • Member for the Government or Third Government member and
    • Government Whip or Fourth Government member;
  • Closing Opposition:
    • Member for the Opposition or Third Opposition member and
    • Opposition Whip or Fourth Opposition member.

Speaking order is

  1. Prime Minister
  2. Opposition Leader;
  3. Deputy Prime Minister;
  4. Deputy Opposition Leader;
  5. Member for the Government;
  6. Member for the Opposition;
  7. Government Whip;
  8. Opposition Whip.
Members will deliver a substantive speech of five or seven minutes duration and should offer points of information while members of the opposing teams are speaking.
Depending on the country, there are variations in speaking time, speaking order, and the number of speakers. For example, in New Zealand, both the leader of the Opposition and the Prime Minister offer a short summary as the last two speakers.

American Parliamentary:

Parliamentary debating in The United States uses two teams who have the following positions:

  • Government
    • Prime Minister (PM)
    • Member of the Government (MG)
  • Opposition
    • Leader of the Opposition (LO)
    • Member of the Opposition (MO)

Parliamentary debate is offered by a number of United States organizations at the tertiary and secondary level. The National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA), the American Parliamentary Debate Association (APDA), and the National Parliamentary Tournament of Excellence (NPTE) are all organizations that offer colleigiate parliamentary debate and use the following speaking and timing order:

  • Prime Minister (7 min)
  • Leader of the Opposition (8 min)
  • Member of the Government (8 min)
  • Member of the Opposition (8 min)
  • Leader of the Opposition Rebuttal (4 min)
  • Prime Minister Rebuttal (5 min)

The California High School Speech Association (CHSSA) and the National Parliamentary Debate League (NPDL) offer high school parliamentary debate, and use the following timing structure:

  • Prime Minister (7 min)
  • Leader of the Opposition (7 min)
  • Member of the Government (7 min)
  • Member of the Opposition (7 min)
  • Leader of the Opposition Rebuttal (5 min)
  • Prime Minister Rebuttal (5 min)

In all of the above United States formats except CHSSA, questions can be asked of the speaker during the first 4 speeches, except during the first and last minute of each speech. Under CHSSA, questions are permitted in all six speeches.

In rebuttals, the speaker can be interrupted by the other team for two reasons. First, for Points of Order, which are used when a speaker is making a new argument or when they are grossly mischaracterizing arguments. Second, for Points of Personal Privilege, which are used when the speaker makes offensive claims, or personal attacks. Points of Personal Privilege are almost never seen. CHSSA does not allow for either Points of Order or Points of Personal Privilege. APDA and NPDL do not allow Points of Personal Privilege.

World Schools Style

World Schools Style (or WSS) is a debating style which is fairly easy to learn. This is a combination of the British Parliamentary and Australian formats, designed to meet the needs of the World Schools Debating Championships tournament. Each debate comprises eight speeches delivered by two three-member teams (the Proposition and the Opposition). Each speaker delivers a six-minute speech; then both teams deliver a "reply speech" lasting four minutes, with the last word being reserved for the Proposition

Each team has three speakers and this is the order in which they speak:

  • First speaker of the Proposition (speaks for 8 minutes, presents the case of the Proposition, defines the motion, gives 2/3 of the arguments of the Proposition)
  • First speaker of the Opposition (speaks for 8 minutes, may accept the definitions or contest them and give an alternative, rebuts Proposition arguments, presents the case of the Opposition, gives 2/3 of the arguments of the Opposition).
  • Second speaker of the Proposition (speaks for 8 minutes, further develops the case of the Proposition, rebuts the arguments of the first speaker of the Opposition, gives 1/3 of the arguments of the Proposition)
  • Second speaker of the Opposition (speaks for 8 minutes, further develops the case of the Opposition, rebuts the arguments given by the second speaker of the Proposition, gives 1/3 of the arguments of the Opposition)
  • Third speaker of the Proposition (speaks for 8 minutes, rebuilds the case of the Proposition, rebuts the arguments of the second speaker of the Opposition, concludes case)
  • Third speaker of the Opposition (speaks for 8 minutes, rebuilds the case of the Opposition, rebuts the arguments of the second speaker of the Opposition - may not introduce a new argument!)
  • Reply speaker of the Opposition (speaks for 4 minutes, outlines clash point, evaluates debate, gives the final appeal) - either the first or the second speaker of the Opposition, usually the first. It is not the third as there is not enough time for the third speaker to write a new speech
  • Reply speaker of the Proposition (speaks for 4 minutes, outlines clash point, evaluates debate, has the last word in protected time!) - either the first or the second speaker of the Opposition, usually the first. It is not the third as there is not enough time for the third speaker to write a new speech

During main speeches, members of the opposing team may offer Points of Information to express a question or brief remark, these shall not exceed 23 seconds or three sentences. First and last minutes of main speeches as well as the entire duration of reply speeches are protected, that means, no Points of Information may be offered. There is no cross examination. The Proposition has to prove the motion for a reasonable majority of cases, while it is not enough for the Opposition to present reasonable doubt.

Policy Debate

Main Article: Policy Debate

Policy is a style of debating where two teams of two students advocate or oppose a resolution calling for a change in policy by the government. Switching sides every round, the affirmative team must propose a policy (plan), while the negative must explain why the policy won’t solve the problems that it intends to, or will cause more problems than good things.

In the US, high school Policy Debate is overseen by the NFL and the NCFL. Inter-Collegiate policy debate is overseen by the National Debate Tournament (NDT), the Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA), the National Educational Debate Association, and the Great Plains Forensic Conference.

The debate consists of eight speeches, four affirmative and four negative, with each debater giving two speeches, one constructive (eight or nine minutes) in which new arguments may be raised and one rebuttal (four, five, or six minutes) in which new evidence, but no new arguments, may be raised. Any issue which goes unaddressed by the opposite side is generally considered to be conceded. The negative team represents the status quo, and so has presumption: in theory, if neither side won the round, the negative team would win. In practical terms, presumption seldom has a role in the debate, but the sequence of speeches reflects the role of presumption.

One member of each two member team is designated as the first or the second speaker. Generally, the first speaker is concise, a quick thinker, and a quick speaker, and the second speaker is more rhetorical, and able to frame the debate in the big picture.

The sequence of speeches is as follows:

1AC: First affirmative constructive: sets out the affirmative team's plan to address the issue in the resolution. The 1A is cross-examined for 3 minutes by the 2N while the 1N prepares for his speech.

1NC: First negative constructive: sets out the negative team's case against the affirmative plan. Cross examination is by the 1A.

2AC: Second affirmative constructive: addresses the negative team's arguments. Cross examination is by the 1N

2NC: second negative constructive: develops half of the arguments from the 1NC. While new arguments are allowed in the 2NC, introducing them at this point is considered to be sneaky or a sign of a bad initial strategy. Cross-examination is by the 2A.

1NR: first negative rebuttal: strategically, this speech can be used to develop substantially one of the arguments from 1NC.

1AR: first affirmative rebuttal. This speech may be extremely fast, as each minute must address about 3 minutes of negative time. Any argument which goes unaddressed in this speech may be considered to have been conceded.

2NR: second negative rebuttal: wraps up the negative case.

2AR: second affirmative rebuttal: wraps up the affirmative case. The affirmative team speaks last because presumption rests with the status quo, as represented by the negative team.

Lincoln-Douglas debate

Main article: Lincoln-Douglas Debate

Lincoln-Douglas debate, is a US format of debating named after the famous series of Senate debates between the two candidates, has two participants who compete against each other. The arguments center around philosophy or abstract values, and thus it is also called a value debate. Lincoln-Douglas debate tends to require less evidence than policy debate, and thus emphasizes logic and reasoning. Most LD cases center around a core value and a value criterion, with the value representing the highest concept that can be achieved under a given resolution and the criterion being the best way to achieve or measure the value. While there are regional variations, most good LD debates occur when both sides agree on a set value, and then must argue their criteria on the best way to achieve or measure that core value. Lincoln-Douglas debate differs markedly on the national circuit from the local circuit. The national circuit is based more on the argumentation itself (known as "the flow") and hard evidence (called "cards"), while local circuits usually focus on rhetoric and encourage a more holistic approach to the topic.

Simulated legislature

High school debate events such as Student Congress, Model United Nations, European Youth Parliament, Junior State of America and the American Legion's Boys State and Girls State events are activities which are based on the premise of the contestants acting as representatives in a mock legislative body.

Moot court

Moot court (simulating appellate advocacy) and Mock trial (usually simulating criminal trials) competitions for law school, undergraduate, and (in some regions) high school students are held throughout the United States.

Other forms of debate

Online Debating

With the increasing popularity and availability of the Internet to people, different opinions arise frequently. This paved the way for more formalized debating websites, typically in the form of online forums or bulletin boards. The debate style is interesting, as research and well thought out points and counterpoints are possible because of the obvious lack of time restraints (although practical time restraints usually are in effect, e.g., no more than 5 days between posts, etc.). Many people use this to strengthen their points, or drop their weaker opinions on things, many times for debate in formalized debates (such as the ones listed above) or for fun arguments with friends. The ease-of-use and friendly environments make new debaters welcome to share their opinions in many communities. Examples of online debating websites are shown in the external links.

U.S. presidential debates

Image:FordCarter.jpg Since the 1976 general election, debates between presidential candidates have been a part of U.S. presidential campaigns. Unlike debates sponsored at the high school or collegiate level, the participants, format, and rules are not independently defined. Nevertheless, in a campaign season heavily dominated by television advertisements, talk radio, sound bites, and spin, they still offer a rare opportunity for citizens to see and hear the two major candidates side-by-side. The format of the presidential debates, though defined differently in every election, is typically more restrictive than many traditional formats, forbidding participants to ask each other questions and restricting discussion of particular topics to short time frames.

The presidential debates were initially sponsored by the League of Women Voters, though since 1988 the two major political parties have taken over the process. In 2004, the Citizens' Debate Commission was formed in the hope of establishing an independent sponsor for presidential debates, with a more voter-centric role in the definition of the participants, format, and rules.

Debate and Argumentation Theory

All forms of debate, whether consciously or not, make certain assumptions about argumentation theory. The core concept of argumentation theory is the notion of advocacy. In most cases, at least one side in a debate needs to maintain the 'truth' of some proposition or advocate some sort of personal or political change or action. A debate could also potentially be between two or more competing propositions or actions. Or debate could also be a purely performative exercise of charisma and emotion with no assumption of fixed advocacy, but it would possibly lose much of its coherence and educational value. On the other hand, evolving and changing advocacies or no advocacies at all might be liberating and permit true advancement and understanding through debate. The variety of different debate forms and activities have different understandings about the nature and limits of advocacy, and different activities have different expectations about whether argumentation theory in relation to advocacy can be challenged within a competitive debate.

See also

International University Debating

International High School Debating

Other

External links

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

International debate organizations

Other related websites

Retrieved from "http://en.freepedia.org/Debate.html"


Views
Personal tools
In other languages
Similar Links