Post by microfarad on May 25, 2010 5:43:40 GMT
I took two years of debate in school. I'm fairly okay. In this thread I am going to lay out the mechanics of a Lincoln Douglass debate and hold debates in this thread. We will be using the official resolution. I can help you write cases.
Basically, an LD debate goes like this...
There are two people, two sides, the Affirmative and the Negative
One side tries to prove the resolution (Affirmative), the other side (Negative) tries to disprove it.
Each side writes a case which they present in their constructive
Each side argues for their case and against the opponent's case.
The speeches are as follows
The 1AC (First affirmative constructive) is a 6 minute speach
A CX (Cross examination) 3 min
The 1NC (First negative constructive) 7 min
A CX 3 min
The 1AR (First Affirmative rebuttal) 4 min
The 1NR (First Negative rebuttal) 6 min
The 2AR 3 min
In the 1AC the Aff (Affirmative) presents their case. In the first CX the Aff asks the Neg clarifying questions. The Aff can also lead the Neg "down a garden path", more on that later. The Neg reads it's case in the 1NC and then argues against the Aff. The Aff argues against the Neg case AND the Neg's rebuttals in the 1AR. The Neg does the same to the Aff in the 1NR. The Aff does this one more time with the 2AR. It may seem as if the debate is bias to the Neg, but usually the Neg is easier to argue.
IF YOUR OPPONENT DROPS (forgets to argue against or carry through an argument) THEY LOSE THAT ARGUMENT. YOU MUST REFUTE EVERY SINGLE POINT AND CARRY ACROSS ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS THAT YOU WISH TO KEEP.
An LD debate centers around a resolution, which is decided by an official LD debate thingy. Every LD debater argues this resolution, as will we.
The 1AC will start:
[resolution] I affirm
Then the 1AC can place burdens that the Neg must either refute or uphold in the debate... "To win my opponent must...".
Then the Aff state's it's value. The V (value) is THE MOST IMPORTANT part of the Aff speech. Be sure to state your value and describe it's impact. Justice is a common one.
Then the Aff states it's value criterion. The VC (value criterion) is extraordinarily important. It is the way that you uphold your V. It is usually a philosophy or ideal (communitarianism, retributive justice, etc.).
ARGUMENTS ARE EITHER DEONTOLOGICAL OR CONSEQUENTIALIST. Deontology is the realm of thought that dictates the the "means justify the ends". I can't shoot my dog, even if it would end his suffering, because shooting things it wrong. Consequentialism dictates that "the ends justify the means". If I kill a man who I know is unknowingly carrying a suitcase with a time bomb onto a plane I will save hundreds of lives. IF A CASE IS INCONSISTENT IN USING DEONTOLOGY AND CONSEQUENTIALISM THEN YOU CAN POINT THAT OUT, EXPLAIN THE LOGIC FLAW, AND PROBABLY WIN.
After the Value/Value criterion the Aff will start in on it's contentions (generally around 3)
C1 (contention 1): BASIC SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT IN ONE PHRASE
Argument analysis
Card (source citation) (author) (quoted material)
Analysis of card
Card
Card
C2: ANOTHER CONTENTION
Like that
Then summarize WHY you win.
The Neg is similar, just their speech is shorter. The neg usually only uses 3 minutes presenting their case, then they move on to the Aff.
One important argument is "abuse". The PRIMARY GOAL OF A DEBATE IS EDUCATION, NOT WINNING. Under this premise you could say to a burden... "My opponent is putting an impossible burden on my side of the debate. There is no possible way I can uphold this burden. Since my opponent would automatically win if you accepted this burden, it reduces clash in the round. Clash is good because it provides education, which is the primary goal of debate.
^^^ That argument is win, just don't use it too much.
One of the prime goals is to state one or more of the following...
1. Your V/VC is better than your opponents because...
2. Your opponent does not uphold their V/VC because...
3. You uphold your opponents V/VC as well or better than they do because...
Also, preemptive arguments refute your opponent before they even make the argument they think you will make. Especially useful in the 1NR because the Neg does not get to refute the 2AR. If you put a preemptive argument in your case it's called a spike.
I will be judging quite a bit off of the V/VC debate, so be sure to say WHY yoiu are winning in the V/VC debate.
Instead of reading speeches you will just write them. I will assume a reading speed of 300 words per minute, so keep your word count within bounds. CX will occur over chat and will be timed.
There is so much to learn about debate, I will add more when I run across stuff you guys do wrong. For starters, we're just going to have a debate. I will tell you what you should do better, and I will add that to this post. I will also tell you what you did well, since nothing is as important as a good example. The current resolution is:
Resolved: Compulsory inclusion of non-felons' DNA in any government database is unjust.
Two people must sign up. I will assign them to be Aff and Neg randomly. You never get to choose.
Basically, an LD debate goes like this...
There are two people, two sides, the Affirmative and the Negative
One side tries to prove the resolution (Affirmative), the other side (Negative) tries to disprove it.
Each side writes a case which they present in their constructive
Each side argues for their case and against the opponent's case.
The speeches are as follows
The 1AC (First affirmative constructive) is a 6 minute speach
A CX (Cross examination) 3 min
The 1NC (First negative constructive) 7 min
A CX 3 min
The 1AR (First Affirmative rebuttal) 4 min
The 1NR (First Negative rebuttal) 6 min
The 2AR 3 min
In the 1AC the Aff (Affirmative) presents their case. In the first CX the Aff asks the Neg clarifying questions. The Aff can also lead the Neg "down a garden path", more on that later. The Neg reads it's case in the 1NC and then argues against the Aff. The Aff argues against the Neg case AND the Neg's rebuttals in the 1AR. The Neg does the same to the Aff in the 1NR. The Aff does this one more time with the 2AR. It may seem as if the debate is bias to the Neg, but usually the Neg is easier to argue.
IF YOUR OPPONENT DROPS (forgets to argue against or carry through an argument) THEY LOSE THAT ARGUMENT. YOU MUST REFUTE EVERY SINGLE POINT AND CARRY ACROSS ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS THAT YOU WISH TO KEEP.
An LD debate centers around a resolution, which is decided by an official LD debate thingy. Every LD debater argues this resolution, as will we.
The 1AC will start:
[resolution] I affirm
Then the 1AC can place burdens that the Neg must either refute or uphold in the debate... "To win my opponent must...".
Then the Aff state's it's value. The V (value) is THE MOST IMPORTANT part of the Aff speech. Be sure to state your value and describe it's impact. Justice is a common one.
Then the Aff states it's value criterion. The VC (value criterion) is extraordinarily important. It is the way that you uphold your V. It is usually a philosophy or ideal (communitarianism, retributive justice, etc.).
ARGUMENTS ARE EITHER DEONTOLOGICAL OR CONSEQUENTIALIST. Deontology is the realm of thought that dictates the the "means justify the ends". I can't shoot my dog, even if it would end his suffering, because shooting things it wrong. Consequentialism dictates that "the ends justify the means". If I kill a man who I know is unknowingly carrying a suitcase with a time bomb onto a plane I will save hundreds of lives. IF A CASE IS INCONSISTENT IN USING DEONTOLOGY AND CONSEQUENTIALISM THEN YOU CAN POINT THAT OUT, EXPLAIN THE LOGIC FLAW, AND PROBABLY WIN.
After the Value/Value criterion the Aff will start in on it's contentions (generally around 3)
C1 (contention 1): BASIC SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT IN ONE PHRASE
Argument analysis
Card (source citation) (author) (quoted material)
Analysis of card
Card
Card
C2: ANOTHER CONTENTION
Like that
Then summarize WHY you win.
The Neg is similar, just their speech is shorter. The neg usually only uses 3 minutes presenting their case, then they move on to the Aff.
One important argument is "abuse". The PRIMARY GOAL OF A DEBATE IS EDUCATION, NOT WINNING. Under this premise you could say to a burden... "My opponent is putting an impossible burden on my side of the debate. There is no possible way I can uphold this burden. Since my opponent would automatically win if you accepted this burden, it reduces clash in the round. Clash is good because it provides education, which is the primary goal of debate.
^^^ That argument is win, just don't use it too much.
One of the prime goals is to state one or more of the following...
1. Your V/VC is better than your opponents because...
2. Your opponent does not uphold their V/VC because...
3. You uphold your opponents V/VC as well or better than they do because...
Also, preemptive arguments refute your opponent before they even make the argument they think you will make. Especially useful in the 1NR because the Neg does not get to refute the 2AR. If you put a preemptive argument in your case it's called a spike.
I will be judging quite a bit off of the V/VC debate, so be sure to say WHY yoiu are winning in the V/VC debate.
Instead of reading speeches you will just write them. I will assume a reading speed of 300 words per minute, so keep your word count within bounds. CX will occur over chat and will be timed.
There is so much to learn about debate, I will add more when I run across stuff you guys do wrong. For starters, we're just going to have a debate. I will tell you what you should do better, and I will add that to this post. I will also tell you what you did well, since nothing is as important as a good example. The current resolution is:
Resolved: Compulsory inclusion of non-felons' DNA in any government database is unjust.
Two people must sign up. I will assign them to be Aff and Neg randomly. You never get to choose.
[M:977802]
That WAS NOT your speech. See my example speaches? You need definitions, value / value criterion, contentions, cards, and at least 2 weeks to write a good speech with my help. I'll let you keep that speech, but unless Qwerty does just as quick of a job... You're gonna lose, and not learn much...