DEBATE HANDBOOK - Lagoon Toastmasters

1 DEBATEHANDBOOKDEBATEHANDBOOKPaulHunsinge r, SpeechDepartmentAlanPrice, DebateRoyWood, ForensicsPrintedwithpermissionof thecopyrightownersbyToastmastersInternat ional, , (714)542-6793 FAX;(714)543-7801(Appreciationis expressedto themanyToastmasterswhohaveassistedin makingthisbookletpossible.)CODE104 Revised1988 CONTENTSI ntroduction5 HowYouCanBenefitfromDebating5 Whatis DEBATE ?5 OrganizingtheDebate5 DebateFormats5 PresumptionandBurden"of Proof.. 6 Issues6 PreparationfortheDebate"6 Contentions.. 7 BuildingYourCase7 Typesof Cases.,..7 SpeakerResponsibilities8 JudgingA Debate9 Bibliography11 TellUsAboutYourDebateProgram12 DebateJudgingSheet13 INTRODUCTIONI ncreasingnumbersof Toastmastersclubsarediscoveringthemanybe nefitsof includingformaldebateas partof formaldebatewillstimulatea debateprogramsalsooffersToastmasterstheo pportunityto makea significantcontributionto ,theprogramcanthenbe expandedtoincludeinter-club,inter-area, thedebatersbecomemorecognizantandpolishe d,theycanthenbeginto inviteoutsidegroupsto selectinga topicthat'sof currentim-portancein yourlocalcommunity.

2 Theparticipantsandtheaudiencewillhavethe chanceto becomemoreknowledgeableaboutthesubjectan dmorereadilyableto forman stagea debateof thisnature,workup an announcementof thetopic,participants,time, to thevariousnewsmediain surealsoto contacttheofficialsof otherorganizations,churchgroups,andschoo ls,invitingtheirmembersor copyof youran-nouncementso theymaypassit aroundor postiton a thebasicprinciplesof learningaboutthesubjectin moredetailshouldreferto thebookslistedon You Can Benefitfrom DebatingA formaldebateoffersto theToastmasteranoutstandingopportunityto developthethreebasicabilitiesthatarethef oundationof developsbetterlistening,thinking,andspea kingnotonlyfor participantsbutforspectatorsas a debatedevelopsyourabilitytomakea quickresponse,presentcoherentarguments.

3 Andmakea clearpresentationof Toastmasterfinda moreidealmethodfor learningcompetitivespeakingin a "head-on" debateis a speakingeventin whichtwosidesusereasoneddiscourseto argueabouta eachteamis to con-vincea panelof judgesandtheaudiencethatitsargumentson thesubjectare betterthanthoseof on logic,butemotionalappealsandlogicalargum entsthatalsocarryemo-tionalweightmaybe ,debategeneral-ly is characterizedby emphasison logical, DebateAnydebatemustbeginwiththepropositi on,orsubject,to be all casesit shouldbe adeclarativesentencewhichadvocatesa changefromthestatusquo(thewaythingsprese ntlyarebeingdone).

4 A debatepropositiongenerallywillbe oneof threegeneraltypes:it willdealwitha questionof policy,fact,or goodtopicwilllikelybeonebasedon policyratherthanfactor beliefbecausea factualpropositionallowstoolittleroomfor argu-ment,whilea propositionbasedon beliefor debatepropositionnormallyis statedin a for-malstyle,whichincludes,basically:"Re solved:Thatshould" Theword"should"is usedto conveythemeaning"oughtto"anddoesnotimply thepropositionindeedwillcometo providemoreinterestin thedebatefor bothpar-ticipantsandaudience,theproposit ionshoulddealwitha topicthat'sof takenwhenwordinga proposi-tion,thatit doesnotprovideunfairadvantageto defined, typicaldebatepropositionswouldbe:"Resolv ed:Thatthenationalgovernmentshouldguaran teetheopportuni-ty fora highereducationto allqualifiedhighschoolgraduates.

5 ""Resolved:Thatthecityshouldputacrosswal kin frontof thereasonsforstatingthepropositioninsuch a wayis thatit providesspeakerstheoppor-tunityto speakeror speakerswilltaketheaffirmativesideof theproposition(supportit),whiletheothers peakeror speakerswilltakethenegativeside(opposeit ).Eachteamthenis iden-tifiedmerelyas "theaffirmative"or "thenegative."Beforeproceedingwiththedeb ate,all participantsshouldagreeuponthewordingof theproposition,makingsureit' constructiveandrebuttalspeechesby controversialtermscontainedin its thewordingshouldbe broughtoutby ,variousformatsmaybe used;butsincenotallof themwillbeof generalinteresttoToastmasters, TraditionalDebate(FourSpeakers)Construct iveSpeechesAffirmative#1-10minutesNegati ve#1-10minutesAffirmative#2-10minutesNeg ative#2-10minutesRebuttalSpeechesNegativ e#1-5minutesAffirmative# 1-5minutesNegative#2-5minutesAffirmative #2-5minutesA specialtypeof workswellin clubprogramsbecauseit includespreparedspeechesanda (FourSpeakers)

6 ConstructiveSpeechesAffirmative# 1- 5 minutesNegative#1-5minutesAffirmative#2- 5minutesNegative#2-5minutesCross-examina tionandRefutationNegative# 1 cross-examinesAffirmative#1-3minutesAffi rmative#2 cross-examinesNegative#2-3minutesNegativ e# 1 refutationandsummary-3minutesAffirmative # 1 refutationandsummary-3minutesPresumption and Burdenof ProofThepresumptionin debateis thatthestatusquois satisfactoryuntilit proofthereforeis changefromthestatusquois a debateareimportantquestionsthatwillbe answeredyesby theaffirmativeandno by substantiatedby theissuesinherentin thewordingof thepro-positionandmustalsobe preparedto ,inquestionsof policy,theseissuesare:1.

7 Is therea need(oris it desirable)for a change?2. Is therea planbywhichtheneedcanbesatisfied?3. Wouldthebenefitsof theplanoutweighthedisadvantages?Issuesfo rthenegativewouldbe :1. Thepresentsystemis satisfactoryor Theproposedplanwouldbe Theproposedchangewillnotbe a practicalsolutionto is advisablewhenplanninga debateforaToastmastersprogramto limitthenumberof issuesinherentin thewordingof "crosswalk"propositionhasonlyonemajoriss uein its wording,whileourotherexamplecon-tainsmor eissuesandwouldtakelongerto the DebateIn theirpreparationfor a DEBATE ,debatersshouldanalyzethepropositi onandtheargumentsfor andagainstits.

8 Thereshouldbeareviewof whatseemsto havecreatedtheproblemindicatedbythewordi ngof thepropositionthenshouldbe studiedto seethatthereis no inherentadvantageforoneteamor generallyis alsoa goodideato the questionto get an ideaof ,collectall the argumentsandevidenceyoucanfindwhichrelat eto magazinesandnewspaperswhichcarryin-forma tionon to narrowthequestionandputasideall thispointin yourpreparationit is helpfulif youcanmutuallyagreewiththeoppositionabou texclusionof ,it maybe agreedthattheconstitu-tionalityof a propositionshouldbe regardedas ir-relevantmaterialsincetheconstitutionh asbeenamendedmanytimesandcanbe muchevidenceas possible,keepingtrackof helpfulto organizeevidenceon cards,keep-ingthesecardsin a boxin frontof theplacewherethedebatewillbeheldandseewh erethetimekeeperis theactualpresentationof thedebatetheaffir-mativedoesnotneedto statethatit hastheburdenof proof,nordoeseitherteamneedto judgesshouldunderstandtheseconceptsin orderto understandtheresponsibilitiesof.

9 Theaffir-mativeteamneednotusetheterm"iss ues"norstatetheissuesin thedebateitself,butspeakersmustunderstan dtheissuesbeforehandso theymaycometo indirectlyfromtheanalysisof the propositionandtheargumentsandareusedto contention,however,is notproofnoris it tobe regardedas an issuein the DEBATE ~Theaffirmativecontentionsusuallyw illbe thatthereis a demandforan immediatechangefromthestatusquoandthatth ischangecanbe broughtaboutin sucha waythatit wouldnotonlysolvetheproblembutwouldbe a developingtheircontentions,theaffirmativ eusuallywillpointouthowtheirplanis , ,thenegativewouldcon-tendthatthe presentsystemis operatingsatisfactorilyandthatnecessarya djustmentsalreadyarebeingmadeforanyevils pointedoutby administrationof the planandits enact-ment,pointingouttherearecertainevi lshere, CaseEachteammustbuildits casein a ,buildinga caseis thefor-mal,methodicalpresentationofyourt eam' caseis builtuponthreetofivemajorcontentions,eac hbackedwithevidenceto supporttheissuesof allowedto standif it is notbackedwithevidence, caseswhichcanbe of CasesTypesof Casesfor the AffirmativeOneof themostcommontypesof casesis theSTOCKISSUECASE.

10 In whichthe affirmativeusesthestockissuesto supportits ,theaffirmativemust:one,establishthatex- istingconditionsdemanda changefromthestatusquo;two,identifya planwhichwillprovidethechange;andthree,s howthattheproposedchangeWIllbe wonby isolatingtheissuesinherentin thepropositionandby presentinglogical,validevidencewhichsupp ortstheseissues.( builtby provingtheopposite.)_ Theconceptmaybe illustratedby comparingitwitha onestate,for ex-ample,is definedas "breakingandenteringabuildingwiththe intentto commita felonyor misde-meanortherein."Alltheitalicizedwor dsconstituteissues,andtheprosecutingatto rney(affirmative)wouldhaveto supporteachof themto winthecase(thedebate).