Introduction About Debate
1. ‘Matter’ relates to the issues in debate, the case being presented and the material used to substantiate argumentation.
2. The issues under debate should be correctly prioritized (by teams) and ordered (by individuals), dealing with the most imp
3. Matter should be logical and well reasoned.
4. Matter should be relevant, both to the issue in contention and the cases being advanced.
5. Matter should be persuasive.
wNo ‘new matter’ is to be introduced during Reply Speeches. The Reply Speech presents teams with an opportunity to focus on the major issue(s) in the debate and the way in which both teams approach that ‘point of Clash’. The Reply Speech should also give an ‘optimistic overview’ of the general approach to the debate by both sides and focus on the relative merits of the case by the side Replying, and the relative weaknesses in the case of the opposing team.
wAll speakers should develop ‘positive matter’ in advancing their respective cases. While an Opposition team may win by demonstrating that the Government has not proved the motion true, they should not rely purely on their rebuttal of the Government case and will likely benefit from presenting positive matter in opposition to the motion.
a) Vocal Style: Volume, clarity, pronunciation, pace, intonation, fluency, confidence, and authority.
b) Language: Conversational.
c) Use of notes: Should not distract, should not be read.
d) Eye Contact: With audience.
e) Gesture: Natural, appropriate.
f) Sincerity: Believability.
g) Personal Attacks: (derogatory comments are not to be tolerated).
h) Humor: Effectiveness, appropriateness.
The major influence on an adjudicator must be: ‘Is the speaker’s and team’s Method EFFECTIVE in advancing the case?’
a) Organization: The structuring of individual arguments and ordering of collective arguments in the speeches .
b) Issue Selection: The identification of relevant points of clash in the round.
c) Perspective: The ability to explain the relevance of individual arguments to the motion being argued.
d) Refutation: The willingness and ability to engage and critique the points offered by the opposing team.
e) Teamwork: The degree to which the members of a team work together to collectively advance a strategy.
How to Choose Motions?
Prioritization of 3 Motions Given Based on:
a) Knowledge Resource of Team members
How much do we know of this issue?
b) Debating Positions of Your Team
What advantage will we have with this motion as Government/Opposition team?
c) Knowledge of Opposing Team’s status
What are the strengths/weaknesses of our Opponents in this debate?
Case Construction involves:
Defining the Motion & Creating Arguments that support it:
Defining the Motion means
a) Clearly stating meanings of “key terms”
E.g. “This House believes that professional athletes are good role models for Chinese youth.”
b) Establish Team Line (Base Line) & Split:
(THBT the world is a global village)
Team Line/Base Line/Stance
Because of the existence of interdependence and common interest
This is true in the a) social arena, b) geopolitical realm and c) economic sphere
c) Creating Arguments that support it
wPrioritize the Arguments with the strongest presented first to prove global interdependence and growing common interest:
wArgument 1 (1stSpeaker)
wSocial Arena --evidence, case studies, statistics, trend analysis, etc
wArgument 2 (1stSpeaker)
wArgument 3 (2ndSpeaker)
wGlobal Economics --ditto
w3rd Speakers must not carry new arguments
Setting Opposition Case
wProposing “Status Quo”
“Why change when things are fine now …”
wOffering a “Counter Proposal”
“Our plan works better than yours ….’
wProvide “Positive Objections”
“Yours does not work and will be harmful to…”
w** Oppn needs to have team line, split, prioritized arguments in 1stand 2ndSpeakers too!
wWhat are Rebuttals?
Arguments raised in response to Oppn’s arguments. Comprises analysis of why Oppn is wrong, is consistent with own case, as well support/reinforce own team line
wHow to do it?
State what argument is rebutted, explain flaw(s) in argument, support it with evidence. examples, case studies, and finally linking it relevantly to your side of the topic.
Rebutting Parts of Arguments
w1. Factual Error: Your argument is factually wrong
“Your statistics/example/case studies are wrong because ….”
w2. Your argument is not supported by any evidence
“You merely asserted that ... without providing any relevant examples…”
w3.The consequences of your argument are not acceptable (morally, socially, etc)
w“How could you ban smoking in pubs when it violates the right of the smoker and his friends to socialize together …”
w“Your policy helps on the minority, the smokers, but what about the majority of the non-smokers who have to inhale second-hand smoke in pubs …”
w5.Your argument is illogical –the conclusions do not follow from the premises
w“You claim that banning cigarette advertisements on TV will cause more young people to smoke as it makes smoking more mysterious and enticing, like a forbidden fruit, but I submit to you that the opposite is more likely to be true: banning a steady stream of advertisements depicting smoking as glamorous/attractive will REDUCE the number of young people who smoke.”
w6. Not Relevant/Irrelevant:
w“The fact that smoking causes cancer is not relevant to this debate because the issue at hand is the right of individual citizens to make informed choices concerning their own personal health ….”
w7. Contradiction in Opponents’ Arguments
wPoint out that the speakers/team are not clear about their own case. To be able to catch the opponents contradicting themselves requires good tracking skills, that is, skills in good note-taking and Active Listening.
w8. Failure to perform roles/responsibilities declared
wPM: “ To totally destroy the Opposition and win today’s debate, the Government will do the following 3 things:
wshow that women are stronger than men
wshow that women are smarter than men
wshow that women are wiser leaders than men
wto prove that women are true heroes of the New Millennium.”
wTo damage the opponents, point out their failure to cover the areas they promised to go over in the PM’s speech.
Rebutting the Case as a Whole
wTo break down the case of the opponents, it is not enough to rebut each/all/random arguments put forth by them.
wWinning a debate will require you to systematically break down a team’s case.
Here are the questions/points to consider
w1 What is their approach to the case? Is it flawed? Why?
w2 What tasks did they set themselves? Did they address them? What problems are there in the way they address them?
w3 What is the general emphasis of the case? What assumptions are made? Can they be refuted?
w4 What are the key arguments of the other side? How can they be shown to be flawed?
w5.Focus on identifying the key issues/arguments which are used to support the case of the opponents and then systematically breaking them down by showing that they cannot stand up to scrutiny.
w**Do not try to shoot down all examples/arguments as there will not be enough time, and is unsystematic.
Point of Information（POI）
wPOIs are comments made by members directed at the speech of
wthe member holding the floor; POI should be brief, pertinent and
wpreferably witty. Points of order and points of personal privilege
Offering & Responding to Points of Information (POIs)
wA POI can be a Question or a Statement/Clarification/Contradiction and should not take more than 15 seconds
wEach Speaker is strongly encourage toAccept at least 2POIs
wAll team members should try to give POIs without being disruptive
How POIs offered are judged
w1.The threat they pose to the strength of the argument of the debater,
w2.Value of its wit and humour
How POIs taken are judged
w1.Promptness and Confidence in answering
w2.Strength of the Response
w3.Value of wit and humour
“please answer my question” “my dear friend”
wWe think this is tremendous waste of your words by always saying “my dear friends”, “please answer my questions” so bluntly.
成绩＝平时考查×10％＋（辩词）× 30％ ＋英语辩论×50％＋实习报告×10%。
1. Advertisers perform a useful service to the community
2. Western-style fast food franchises are harmful to the people of China
3. The May Festival should not have been shortened
4. Pop stars certainly earn their money
5. Examinations exert a pernicious influence on education
6. Should China discourage foreign nationals from adopting Chinese orphans？
7. China should require a certain amount of physical exercise of all able citizens each week
? New graduates should lower job expectation
? 正反方各有一队进入决赛。评选8名最佳辩手 冠军队、亚军队
Topic：World Governments Should Conduct Serious Campaigns Against Smoking
The argument : key words
1. Definite link: smoking and bronchial troubles, heart disease, lung cancer.
2. Governments hear, see, smell, no evil.
3. A few governments: timid measures.
4. E.g. Britain: TV advertising banned; nation’s conscience appeased; cancerous death.
5. Official reactions to medical findings: lukewarm.
6. Tobacco: source of revenue. E. g. Britain: tobacco tax pays for educations.
7. A short- sighted policy.
8. Enormous sums spent fighting the disease; lives lost.
9. Smoking should be banned altogether.
10. We are not ready for such drastic act
11. But governments, if really concerned, should conduct aggressive anti-smoking campaigns.
12. The tobacco industry spends vast sums on advertising.
13. Advertising: insidious, dishonest.
14. Never shown pictures of real smokers coughing up lungs, on
15. Smoking associated with great open-air life, beautiful girls, togetherness, Nonsense!
16. All advertising should be banned; anti-smoking campaign conducted.
17. Smoking should be banned in public places.
18. Young people should be warned, dire consequences.
19. Warning, death’s head, included in every packet.
20. Governments should protect us from ourselves.
The counter-argument key words
1. There are still scientists who doubt smoking / cancer link.
2. People who don’t smoke should keep quiet.
3. Smoking brings many psychological benefits:
4. Relieves stresses of everyday life: provides constant consolation.
5. E. g. we smoke when taking exams, worried, bereaved, etc.
6. Associated with good living; social contacts made easier.
7. Smoking is very enjoyable: relaxing, e.g. with a cup of coffee; after a meal, etc.
8. It’s absurd to suggest we ban it after so many hundreds of years.
9. Enormous interests involved: governments, tobacco growers, tobacco industries, retail businesses.
10. Tax apart, imp
11. People should be free to decide, not bullied by governments; banning is undemocratic.
12. The tobacco industry spends vast sums on medical research.
13. Improved filters have resulted; e.g. Columbia University.
14. Now possible to smoke and enjoy it without danger.
1. A big black bug bit a big black bear, made the big black bear bleed blood.
2. A flea and a fly flew up in a flue. Said the flea, "Let us fly!" Said the fly, "Let us flee!" So they flew through a flaw in the flue.
3. A tidy tiger tied a tie tighter to tidy her tiny tail.
4. A writer named Wright was instructing his little son how to write Wright right. He said: "It is not right to write Wright as 'rite'---try to write Wright aright!"
5. Betty Botter had some butter, "But," she said, "this butter's bitter. If I bake this bitter butter, it would make my batter bitter. But a bit of better butter -- that would make my batter better."
6. Bill's big brother is building a beautiful building between two big brick blocks.
7. He thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
8. How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? He would chuck, he would, as much as he could, and chuck as much wood as a woodchuck would if a woodchuck could chuck wood.
9. I thought a thought. But the thought I thought wasn't the thought I thought I thought.
10. If you notice this notice you will notice that this notice is not worth noticing.
11. If a shipshape ship shop stocks six shipshape shop-soiled ships, how many shipshape shop-soiled ships would six shipshape ship shops stock?
12. Sarah sitting in her sitting room, all she does is sits and shifts, all she does is sits and shifts.
13. She sells seashells by the sea shore. The shells she sells are surely seashells. So if she sells shells on the seashore, I'm sure she sells seashore shells.
14. Three gray geese in the green grass grazing. Gray were the geese and green was the grass.
15. While we were walking, we were watching window washers wash Washington's windows with warm washing water.
16. A Finnish fisher named Fisher failed to fish any fish on
17. Where is the watch I put in my pocket to take to the shop because it had stopped?
18. Mr. Cook said to a cook: "Look at this cook-book. It's very good." So the cook took the advice of Mr. Cook and bought the book.
19. How much dew would a dewdrop drop if a dewdrop could drop dew?
20. Sandy sniffed sweet smelling sunflower seeds while sitting beside a swift stream.
? The animals in the forest are holding a meeting...
? I saw a woman in a car accident...
? flower, butterfly, cry
? frog, cloud, horse
? boy, death, laugh
? TV, president, writer
1. If I were the Dean of Foreign Languages Department…
2. Planes, Cars, bicycles, or on foot, which do you prefer?
3. If I were a reporter, I’d like to cover entertainment news, international news, domestic news, or documentaries.
4. If I were a writer, I would focus on … in my novels in this Wenchuan Earthquake.