Corporate Team Training Session # 2 May 30 / June 1
|
|
- Brendan Glenn
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 5 th Annual Great Corporate Debate Corporate Team Training Session # 2 May 30 / June 1 Stephen Buchanan Education Consulting
2 Outline of Session # 2 Great Corporate Debate Review Contest, Rules, Judges Criteria, etc. Quick Review of previous session Debate Format and Strategies Debate Format and Process Teamwork Judging Criteria Basic Strategies Affirmative - Negative Constructive - Rebuttal Detailed Format, Timeline of Responsibilities Homework Selection of teams/topics for Session 3 debates Topic A - Topic B
3 Training Sessions Schedule May 30 June 1 June 6 June 8
4 REVIEW Contest, Rules, Judges Criteria, etc See AMCHAM Manual
5 Argument REVIEW Argument, Reasoning Definition Facts/premise + (assumption) Conclusion Reasoning Reasoning is the process of drawing conclusions from facts or premises
6 REVIEW What is debate? Debate is the process of presenting arguments for or against a proposition Propositions of fact, value and policy We will argue propositions of policy in our debates Policy propositions will propose a course of action for the future The purpose of debate is to Persuade
7 REVIEW Debating Propositions of Policy GOAL: Understanding the elements of a proposition allow debater to better attack, argue, support & defend it.
8 REVIEW Debating Propositions of Policy Propositions How to analyze and address the proposition: What is the problem and how serious is it? What are the various solutions, with the advantages and disadvantages of each? What is the best solution?
9 REVIEW Debating Propositions of Policy Main Issues in Propositions of Policy: Are evils caused by the present system? Are these evils great enough to demand a change? Are the evils inherent and impossible to repair in the present system? Will the proposed solution remove the evils? Is the proposed solution free from objections? Is the proposed solution the best?
10 Research, Preparation and Development of Evidence Sources of Material Yourself Opinions and Knowledge of Others Discussion Personal Interviews Letters and Observation Experiments and Research Libraries Internet Research
11 Research, Preparation and Development of Evidence Types of Evidence Factual Statistical Opinions of Authorities Testimony of Witnesses Documents, legal papers
12 Research, Preparation and Development of Evidence Recording Data Computer (not permitted in the actual debate) Paper Index cards
13 Debate Format and Process
14 Debate Elements and Format Format Constructive and Rebuttal (Affirmative and Negative) Affirmative: for the motion, problem in the status quo, solution or proposal to solve that problem: burden of proof, prove the case. Negative: against the motion, just denies, say no (and why), rebuttals. Could present a case. Team Order of Presentations Responsibilities of Presenters Flowing or Flow Sheeting
15 TIMELINE FOR A POLICY DEBATE CONSTRUCTIVE First Affirmative Constructive First Negative Constructive Second Affirmative Constructive Second Negative Constructive REBUTTAL First Negative Rebuttal First Affirmative Rebuttal Second Negative Rebuttal Second Affirmative Rebuttal 1AC 3 min 1NC 3 min 2AC 4 min 2NC 4 min 1NR 5 min 1AR 5 min 2NR 2 min 2AR 2 min
16 Debate Elements and Format Debate Format 1st part: constructive speeches 1st Affirmative 3 minutes Introduction 1st Negative 3 minutes Introduction 2nd Affirmative 4 minutes Constructive 2nd Negative 4 minutes Constructive Case: thesis, definition of terms, arguments Framework Decision criterions Clash Topicality Rebuttal 1A (Counterplan) Close case Prepare opposition block Rebuttal 1N Rebuttal 1A and 2A Defensive arguments (Close case) Ethos, Pathos, Logos Ethos, Pathos, Logos Logos Logos
17 Debate Elements and Format Debate Format 2nd part: rebuttal speeches 3rd Negative 5 minutes Rebuttal 3rd Affirmative 5 minutes Rebuttal 4th Negative 2 minutes Conclusion 4th Affirmative 2 minutes Conclusion No new arguments Defensive arguments Refute all No new arguments Defensive arguments Refute all No new arguments Summary Synthesis No new arguments Summary Synthesis Logos Logos Logos, Pathos Logos, Pathos
18 Debate Elements and Format Flowing / Flow Sheeting Taking notes properly ("flow sheeting or "flowing is the debate term) is an essential entry level skill... In order to answer arguments by your opponents, you must be able to write them down so that you can remember them and respond to them in order. Likewise, your flow sheet becomes the text which you use when you speak... it becomes the notes which you speak from... More than any other skill besides speaking itself, flow sheeting is important to your debate experience...and important to winning.
19 Debate Teamwork Team vs. Individuals Each participant has a role Everyone participates and contributes Everyone flows
20 Judging Criteria Knowing the criteria by which you are judged will be the first strategy to effective and successful debating
21 Judging Criteria Criteria from GCD Committee See Handout
22 Judges Evaluations Criteria for winning Formula for winning Strategy for winning BE PREPARED BE PERSUASIVE
23 Judges Evaluations Evaluation Format Each speech will be graded (1-5) in the following criteria. The scores will be added up to determine the overall winner: Content (Matter): Argumentation Evidence / Information Strategy / structure Form (Manner): Oral expression Body Language English (not graded) Penalization: Reading Time Inappropriate behavior
24 Evaluation Format / Criteria CONTENT Judges Penalization FORM Judge Penalization Strategy 1-5 Argumentation 1-5 Information 1 5 Inappropriate Behavior (-1) (-5) Body language 1-5 Oral expression 1-5 Reading (-1) (-5) Time (-1) (-5)
25 Debating Strategy The Affirmative and Negative Cases
26 Primary Debate Format & Strategies Affirmative Case First Affirmative Constructive Second Affirmative Constructive First Affirmative Rebuttal Second Affirmative Rebuttal
27 Primary Debate Format & Strategies Negative Case Attacking the Affirmative Case First Negative Constructive Second Negative Constructive First Negative Rebuttal Second Negative Rebuttal
28 Debate Strategies The Affirmative Case The problem Status Quo is evil Attention (solution) is needed, must be relevant & important. Nothing has been done; nothing has solved the problem. The solution / plan Inherency: causal relationship with the problem Solvency: solves the problem
29 Debate Strategies The Affirmative Cases The Stock Issue Case Status Quo needs change Plan will provide change Proposed plan is better than Status Quo Chain of Reasoning Case Topical Case Disjunctive Case Residue Case See the TM outline of Affirmative Case
30 Debate Strategies The Negative Case Attacking the affirmative case : Basic Attack Disadvantages Counterplan Critiques (K) Topicality
31 The Negative Case Basic Attack: Deny the problem Attack Significance: no attention (solution) is needed; it s been attended, solution is on the way. Attack the solution/ plan Attack Inherency: deny causal relation between the problem and the plan. Attack Solvency: deny that the plan solves the problem. Beware of contradictions if you deny the problem.
32 The Negative Case Disadvantages Attack: Disadvantage is that if we adopted the policy of the other team (plan), something bad would result. Link: causal relation with the plan. Internal links: causal relation within the disadvantage. Beware of the slippery slope Impact: something bad /worse WILL happen. Uniqueness: only the affirmative plan will cause this. Affirmative choices: Deny link with the plan. Prove slippery slope fallacy. Turn impact: is not bad, actually is good. Deny uniqueness: whatever we do, that will happen.
33 The Negative Case Counterplan: Counterplan is alternative plan to solve the problem Inherency and solvency = non-topical. Competes with the affirmative; net benefits; better to adopt this solution rather than both. Mutually exclusive. Affirmative responses: Our own is better, adopt only one. Permutation test = not competitive. Solvency Disadvantages
34 The Negative Case Critiques ( K ): Critiques are a way to attack the critical assumptions an affirmative makes or the language debaters use to make their arguments. What is an assumption? Is a part of an argument which people think is true, but they never explicitly prove to be true and serves as the major premise of the argument or the case. How does a negative attack the assumptions? First, the negative must identify the assumption and how it is revealed. Second, the negative must explain how the assumption links to the critique. And, third, the negative must explain the implications of the critique. Source:
35 Topicality : The Negative Case Topicality deals with arguments about what words mean; arguing about definitions regarding the motion or resolution: be at home at a reasonable hour. Affirmative definition of terms must be topical; both the problem and the plan must be within the motion: LIMIT what the affirmative may talk about so the negative can have a reasonable chance to argue against the case Negative tasks: Define terms and give reasons to prefer negative definition: Source: uvm.edu/code/042.html
36 Detailed Format and Timeline of Responsibilities
37 1AC - FIRST AFFIRMATIVE CONSTRUCTIVE Have your speech written out and well organized. Time it in advance so that you know how long it takes you to read it. Practice it so that you sound good and know how to correctly say all of the words in it. Make sure you have covered all the requirements -- read the topic, significance, inherency, plan, solvency. Make sure each of the major issues has evidence which proves it.
38 1NC - FIRST NEGATIVE CONSTRUCTIVE Your disadvantages need links and impacts; your topicality arguments need definitions, violations, and voting issue; and your counterplan needs a counterplan text, topicality, competitiveness, advantage, and solvency.
39 2AC - SECOND AFFIRMATIVE CONSTRUCTIVE ANSWER EVERY NEGATIVE ISSUE: You cannot win the debate if you fail to answer an off-case argument like topicality, a disadvantage, a counterplan,, or a critique. Have some good answers for each one. Explaining their arguments is their duty, not yours. Your duty is to answer them. Don't waste time telling the judge what their arguments are about.
40 2NC - SECOND NEGATIVE CONSTRUCTIVE 2NC and 1NR occur back to back, so you need to divide up the issues in the debate. The 2NC should take some issues and the 1NR should take others. You need to deal with each and every one of the answers the 2AC makes to your arguments. Have your best evidence on the issues you will be "going for out and ready to use before you speak.
41 1NR - FIRST NEGATIVE REBUTTAL 2NC and 1NR occur back to back, so you need to divide up the issues in the debate. The 2NC should take some issues and the 1NR should take others, BUT THEY SHOULD NEVER COVER THE SAME GROUND.
42 1AR - FIRST AFFIRMATIVE REBUTTAL The purpose of the 1AR is simple: don't lose the debate. The strategy is equally simple: don't drop anything. Cover every important argument. You cannot answer each sub-point on an argument, but you should answer any argument which could potentially win the debate for the negative.
43 2NR - SECOND NEGATIVE REBUTTAL Now is the time to put all of your eggs in one basket. The negative search for truth ends in the 2NR. Winning requires the 2NR to choose the issues and approach to create a persuasive bottom line negative position. The 2NR cannot pursue everything in the debate because the judge must be told which arguments to consider. There are two ways to win in the 2NR: "Win the Drop" or "Win the Position."
44 2AR - SECOND AFFIRMATIVE REBUTTAL The general strategy of the 2AR is to re-establish establish case advantage(s) and to minimize or take out the impacts of the negative arguments. In order to minimize the impact of the negative arguments, go to the best issue in the middle of your speech. This trick tends to de-emphasize emphasize the arguments that the 2NR claimed were critical in the debate. In order to re-establish establish your case advantage, begin your speech with your own agenda or overview that puts forth the most compelling reason to vote affirmative. Have a good conclusion.
45 Practice Debates Topics assigned. Which topics/side did you receive? Setting up the teams: What are your respective roles? Do Research and Develop Arguments Let s s debate (and evaluate) next week A vs. B, C vs. D
46 Practice Debates Each team will have four debaters We will follow same time limits as in official debates Everyone flows All others not debating will be judges BE PREPARED BE PERSUASIVE
47 Education Consulting Asesoría a Educacional en Chile educonsul.cl Av. Apoquindo Piso 5 Las Condes - Santiago Chile (56-2) (56-2) fax info@educonsul.cl
Corporate Team Training Session # 2 June 8 / 10
3 rd Annual Great Corporate Debate Corporate Team Training Session # 2 June 8 / 10 Stephen Buchanan Education Consulting Outline of Session # 2 Persuasion topics Great Corporate Debate Review Contest,
More informationDebate Vocabulary 203 terms by mdhamilton25
Debate Vocabulary 203 terms by mdhamilton25 Like this study set? Create a free account to save it. Create a free account Accident Adapting Ad hominem attack (Attack on the person) Advantage Affirmative
More informationJUDGING Policy Debate
JUDGING Policy Debate Table of Contents Overview... 2 Round Structure... 3 Parts of an Argument... 4 How to Determine the Winner... 5 What to Do After the Round... 6 Sample Ballot... 7 Sample Flow Sheet...
More informationOpposition Strategy. NCFA Rookie Debate Camp
Opposition Strategy NCFA Rookie Debate Camp Agenda A Brief Word on Trichotomy Basic Path to Winning Opposition Strategies by Position* Quick Overview of Refutation Strength Specific OPP Arguments Activity
More information1) What is the universal structure of a topicality violation in the 1NC, shell version?
Varsity Debate Coaching Training Course ASSESSMENT: KEY Name: A) Interpretation (or Definition) B) Violation C) Standards D) Voting Issue School: 1) What is the universal structure of a topicality violation
More informationb. Use of logic in reasoning; c. Development of cross examination skills; d. Emphasis on reasoning and understanding; e. Moderate rate of delivery;
IV. RULES OF LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE A. General 1. Lincoln-Douglas Debate is a form of two-person debate that focuses on values, their inter-relationships, and their relationship to issues of contemporary
More informationIII. RULES OF POLICY (TEAM) DEBATE. A. General
III. RULES OF POLICY (TEAM) DEBATE A. General 1. All debates must be based on the current National High School Debate resolution chosen under the auspices of the National Topic Selection Committee of the
More information2013 IDEA Global Youth Forum in Ireland
2013 IDEA Global Youth Forum in Ireland Coaches and Judges Track Participant packet August 13 th 26 th Ireland, Galway Curriculum Prepared by: Lazar Pop Ivanov Mark Woosley Dovile Venskutonyte Sergei Naumoff
More information8/12/2011. Facts (observations) compare with. some code (standard) resulting in a. Final Conclusion. Status Quo the existing state of things
DEBATE ISSUES What is debate actually about? What is the terminology? How is it structured? FORENSIC REASONING Facts (observations) compare with some code (standard) resulting in a Final Conclusion DEFINITIONS
More informationToastmasters International Debate Organizer (Summarized)
General Information Toastmasters International Debate Organizer (Summarized) Location: Date/Format: Resolved: Judge 1: Judge 3: Judge 2: Judge 4(?): Affirmative Speaker 1: Negative Speaker 1: Affirmative
More informationMPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic
MPS 17 The Structure of Persuasion Logos: reasoning, reasons, good reasons not necessarily about formal logic Making and Refuting Arguments Steps of an Argument You make a claim The conclusion of your
More information2. Public Forum Debate seeks to encourage the development of the following skills in the debaters: d. Reasonable demeanor and style of presentation
VI. RULES OF PUBLIC FORUM DEBATE A. General 1. Public Forum Debate is a form of two-on-two debate which ask debaters to discuss a current events issue. 2. Public Forum Debate seeks to encourage the development
More informationNEGATIVE POSITION: Debate AICE: GP/Pavich
NEGATIVE POSITION: Debate AICE: GP/Pavich The FIRST STEP in your position as the Negative Team is to analyze the PROPOSITION proposed by the Affirmative Team, since this statement is open to interpretation
More informationCOACHING THE BASICS: WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT?
COACHING THE BASICS: WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT? Some people think that engaging in argument means being mad at someone. That s one use of the word argument. In debate we use a far different meaning of the term.
More informationRULES FOR DISCUSSION STYLE DEBATE
RULES FOR DISCUSSION STYLE DEBATE Junior High Discussion (2 Person Teams) Beginner Level Open Level 1 st Affirmative Constructive 5 min 6 min 1 st Negative Constructive 5 min 6 min 2 nd Affirmative Constructive
More informationVarsity LD: It s All About Clash. 1:15 pm 2:30 pm TUESDAY, June 26
Varsity LD: It s All About Clash. 1:15 pm 2:30 pm TUESDAY, June 26 Session will discuss on how to refute arguments more effectively. Tim Cook Salado High School Tim.cook@saladoisd.org Attention All Attendees:
More informationAn Introduction to Parliamentary Debate
What is Parliamentary Debate? At the most basic level, Parli is a form of debate in which you and a partner from your own team debate 2 people from another team. You are debating to support or oppose a
More informationThe Code of the Debater
The Code of the Debater The Code of the Debater Introduction to Policy Debating Alfred C. Snider International Debate Education Association New York Amsterdam Brussels International Debate Education Association
More informationDEBATE HANDBOOK. Paul Hunsinger, Ph.D. Chairman of Speech Department. Alan Price, M.A. Assistant Director of Debate
DEBATE HANDBOOK DEBATE HANDBOOK Paul Hunsinger, Ph.D. Chairman of Speech Department Alan Price, M.A. Assistant Director of Debate Roy Wood, Ph.D. Director of Forensics Printed with permission of the copyright
More informationWhat is Debate? Debating vs. Arguing. Formal Debate vs. Informal Debate
What is Debate? Debating vs. Arguing Formal Debate vs. Informal Debate What is Debate? Formal debates are structured exchanges of ideas which adhere to pre-determined rules intended to be fair. Different
More informationAnnotated Works Consulted
Annotated Works Consulted Step One Find the sources Tip: Find more than 12 sources, because some may not be as informative or ontopic as they first appear. Keeping Your Research Organized Keep a folder
More informationBuilding Your Framework everydaydebate.blogspot.com by James M. Kellams
Building Your Framework everydaydebate.blogspot.com by James M. Kellams The Judge's Weighing Mechanism Very simply put, a framework in academic debate is the set of standards the judge will use to evaluate
More informationPower Match opponent has the same win/loss record as you
LD Basics Terms to know 1. Value Foundation for your case Clash of value and support of value is imperative to your case. Ex. Morality, justice, freedom of speech 2. Criterion- Supporting thesis statement
More informationAFFIRMATIVE POSITION: Debate AICE: GP/Pavich
AFFIRMATIVE POSITION: Debate AICE: GP/Pavich The FIRST STEP in your position as the Affirmative Team is to develop a PROPOSITION, or a statement that is open to interpretation by both teams; it will serve
More information!1 of!8 Nest+M Debate. Nest + M Debate
!1 of!8 Nest+M Debate Nest + M Debate !2 of!8 Nest+M Debate Table of Contents 1: Cover Page 2: Table of Contents 3: Debate Tryouts Information 4: Debate Videos 5-8: Basic Debate Speech Breakdown (AREI)
More informationThe Disadvantage Uniqueness: Link:
The Disadvantage When you think about debating the opposing viewpoint of any situation what comes to mind? Whether you are debating Twinkies versus Ding Dongs or if national missile defense is a good idea,
More informationResolved: Connecticut should eliminate the death penalty.
A Coach s Notes 1 Everett Rutan Xavier High School everett.rutan@moodys.com or ejrutan3@acm.org Connecticut Debate Association AITE October 15, 2011 Resolved: Connecticut should eliminate the death penalty.
More informationThe Robins Debate 2017 Version /17/16 Table of Contents
The Robins Debate 2017 Version 1.0 10/17/16 Table of Contents I. General Information Page 2 II. Debate Format Page 3 III. Day of Event Timing Page 4 IV. Judging Guidelines Pages 5-7 V. Judging Ballot Page
More informationRules for NZ Young Farmers Debates
Rules for NZ Young Farmers Debates All debaters must be financial members of the NZYF Club for which they are debating at the time of each debate. 1. Each team shall consist of three speakers. 2. Responsibilities
More informationWar Protests & Free Speech: Guide to Critical Analysis
Record: 1 Title: Source: Document Type: Subjects: Abstract: Lexile: Full Text Word Count: ISBN: Accession Number: Database: War Protests & Free Speech: Guide to Critical Analysis. Points of View: War Protests
More informationCHAPTER 13: UNDERSTANDING PERSUASIVE. What is persuasion: process of influencing people s belief, attitude, values or behavior.
Logos Ethos Pathos Chapter 13 CHAPTER 13: UNDERSTANDING PERSUASIVE What is persuasion: process of influencing people s belief, attitude, values or behavior. Persuasive speaking: process of doing so in
More informationVideo: How does understanding whether or not an argument is inductive or deductive help me?
Page 1 of 10 10b Learn how to evaluate verbal and visual arguments. Video: How does understanding whether or not an argument is inductive or deductive help me? Download transcript Three common ways to
More informationI have listed the author of each lesson only so that you can ask the author for help interpreting or fleshing out their ideas.
To Staff: Greetings, and welcome to the WDI 2004 staff-produced booklet of lesson plans and activities. This is designed to make your job easier. If we can make your job easier in any way, please let me
More informationIntro: The Toulmin Model for Arguments
Intro: The Toulmin Model for Arguments The Toulmin Argument The twentieth-century British philosopher Stephen Toulmin noticed that good, realistic arguments typically will consist of six parts: Claim:
More informationExplanations. - Provide an explanation of how your evidence supports your point
Claim - Expresses your position or stand on the issue (YOUR OPINION ON A TOPIC) - States precisely what you believe (and perhaps WHY you believe it) - This is the viewpoint you want readers to accept or
More informationChrist-Centered Critical Thinking. Lesson 6: Evaluating Thinking
Christ-Centered Critical Thinking Lesson 6: Evaluating Thinking 1 In this lesson we will learn: To evaluate our thinking and the thinking of others using the Intellectual Standards Two approaches to evaluating
More informationteachers guide to policy debate
teachers guide to policy debate 2 nd Edition By: Sophie Elsner & Matt Grimes A project of the Rhode Island Urban Debate League and the Swearer Center for Public Service at Brown University This work is
More informationStatement. Assertion. Elaboration. Reasoning. Argument Building. Statement / Assertion
Argument Building Statement Assertion Elaboration Reasoning Example Example Statement / Assertion Is the title/ lable of your argument. It should be precise and easy to understand. Better assertions help
More informationClaim Types C L A S S L E C T U R E N O T E S Identifying Types of Claims in Your Papers
Claim Types C L A S S L E C T U R E N O T E S Identifying Types of in Your Papers Background: Models of Argument Most textbooks for College Composition devote a chapter to the Classical Model of argument
More informationDebate and Debate Adjudication
Debate and Debate Adjudication Rachmat Nurcahyo,M.A. Yogyakarta State University National Polythecnic English Debate Competition 2012, Tual Maluku Tenggara Overview What is Competitive Debate Understanding
More informationFigures removed due to copyright restrictions.
Lincoln/Douglas Debate Figures removed due to copyright restrictions. Debating is like Fencing Thrust Making assertions backed by evidence Parry R f Refuting opponents assertions Burden of Proof In a formal
More informationCHRISTIAN COMMUNICATORS OF OHIO SPEECH AND DEBATE PROGRAM
CHRISTIAN COMMUNICATORS OF OHIO SPEECH AND DEBATE PROGRAM There are a variety of competitive speech and debate programs in which young people may participate. While the programs may have some similarities,
More informationThe Critical Mind is A Questioning Mind
criticalthinking.org http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-critical-mind-is-a-questioning-mind/481 The Critical Mind is A Questioning Mind Learning How to Ask Powerful, Probing Questions Introduction
More informationArgumentation Techniques
Grab the handout from the outbox. Read both argumentative pieces regarding Miley Cyrus. Mark the components listed on the scavenger hunt on the back side. (claim, evidence, explanation, counter-claim,
More informationWriting Module Three: Five Essential Parts of Argument Cain Project (2008)
Writing Module Three: Five Essential Parts of Argument Cain Project (2008) Module by: The Cain Project in Engineering and Professional Communication. E-mail the author Summary: This module presents techniques
More informationOf Mice and Men Mock Trial Expert Witness Packet
Of Mice and Men Mock Trial Expert Witness Packet Responsibilities: You will review the activity and the perspectives we learned and discussed when we asked whether we trusted people to decide whether a
More informationCONDITIONALITY, CHEATING COUNTERPLANS, AND CRITIQUES: TOPIC CONSTRUCTION AND THE RISE OF THE NEGATIVE CASE
Contemporary Argumentation & Debate, 2010 39 CONDITIONALITY, CHEATING COUNTERPLANS, AND CRITIQUES: TOPIC CONSTRUCTION AND THE RISE OF THE NEGATIVE CASE Aaron T. Hardy, Whitman College Abstract: Modern
More informationWas the French Revolution Worth Its Human Cost?
CHY4U Was the French Revolution Worth Its Human Cost? ISSUE SUMMARY YES: Peter Kroptkin (1842-1921), a Russian prince, revolutionary, and anarchist, argues that the French Revolution eradicated both serfdom
More informationThe Field of Logical Reasoning: (& The back 40 of Bad Arguments)
The Field of Logical Reasoning: (& The back 40 of Bad Arguments) Adapted from: An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments: Learn the lost art of making sense by Ali Almossawi *Not, by any stretch of the imagination,
More informationINTRODUCTION TO LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE
INTRODUCTION TO LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE What is LD Lincoln-Douglas is a one-on-one debate between two people, one of them affirming and the other negating a resolution: that is, you re either for it or
More informationResolved: The United States should adopt a no first strike policy for cyber warfare.
A Coach s Notes 1 Everett Rutan Xavier High School ejrutan3@ctdebate.org or ejrutan3@acm.org Connecticut Debate Association Amity High School and New Canaan High School November 17, 2012 Resolved: The
More informationThe SAT Essay: An Argument-Centered Strategy
The SAT Essay: An Argument-Centered Strategy Overview Taking an argument-centered approach to preparing for and to writing the SAT Essay may seem like a no-brainer. After all, the prompt, which is always
More informationArgumentative Writing. 9th Grade - English Language Arts Ms. Weaver - Qrtr 3/4
Argumentative Writing 9th Grade - English Language Arts Ms. Weaver - Qrtr 3/4 Unit Objectives IWBAT - Write an argumentative essay that supports claims in an analysis of a topic and uses valid reasoning,
More informationDEBATING - First Speaker Guide. We, the team, believe that this statement is true/false.
DEBATING - First Speaker Guide Topic Position Team-line Affirmative/Negative Greeting and Introduction Good chairperson, opposition and audience. The topic for today's debate is that We, the team, believe
More information2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. 1
Chapter 1 What Is Philosophy? Thinking Philosophically About Life CHAPTER SUMMARY Philosophy is a way of thinking that allows one to think more deeply about one s beliefs and about meaning in life. It
More informationThe Toulmin Model in Brief
The Toulmin Model in Brief A popular form of argument is the Toulmin model (other forms include classical and Rogerian). This model is named after Stephen Toulmin, who in The Uses of Argument proposed
More informationCHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument
CHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument General Overview: As our students often attest, we all live in a complex world filled with demanding issues and bewildering challenges. In order to determine those
More informationPresuppositional Apologetics
by John M. Frame [, for IVP Dictionary of Apologetics.] 1. Presupposing God in Apologetic Argument Presuppositional apologetics may be understood in the light of a distinction common in epistemology, or
More information1 Chapter 6 (Part 2): Assessing Truth Claims
1 Chapter 6 (Part 2): Assessing Truth Claims In the previous tutorial we saw that the standard of acceptability of a statement (or premise) depends on the context. In certain contexts we may only require
More informationArgument and Persuasion. Stating Opinions and Proposals
Argument and Persuasion Stating Opinions and Proposals The Method It all starts with an opinion - something that people can agree or disagree with. The Method Move to action Speak your mind Convince someone
More informationCreating a Persuasive Speech
Creating a Persuasive Speech Argumentation - Review Every argument needs to have three parts: Claim Your main idea/point Evidence Support from other sources (may fall within logos, pathos and/or ethos)
More informationWorld Religions. These subject guidelines should be read in conjunction with the Introduction, Outline and Details all essays sections of this guide.
World Religions These subject guidelines should be read in conjunction with the Introduction, Outline and Details all essays sections of this guide. Overview Extended essays in world religions provide
More informationPhilosophy 12 Study Guide #4 Ch. 2, Sections IV.iii VI
Philosophy 12 Study Guide #4 Ch. 2, Sections IV.iii VI Precising definition Theoretical definition Persuasive definition Syntactic definition Operational definition 1. Are questions about defining a phrase
More informationFull file at
Chapter 1 What is Philosophy? Summary Chapter 1 introduces students to main issues and branches of philosophy. The chapter begins with a basic definition of philosophy. Philosophy is an activity, and addresses
More informationPolicy Debate: An Introduction for Urban Debate League Students and Coaches Written by Andrew Brokos Edited by Eric Tucker and Les Lynn
Policy Debate: An Introduction for Urban Debate League Students and Coaches Written by Andrew Brokos Edited by Eric Tucker and Les Lynn 1 Table of Contents Introduction 4 Policy Debate Basics 11 Overview
More informationThe Great Debate Assignment World War II. Date Assigned: Thursday, June 11 Date Due: Wednesday, June 17 / 32 marks
The Great Debate Assignment World War II Date Assigned: Thursday, June 11 Date Due: Wednesday, June 17 / 32 marks For this task, you will be divided into groups to prepare to debate on an aspect of World
More informationDeveloping arguments for the persuasive speech. Developing arguments for the persuasive speech.zip
Developing arguments for the persuasive speech Developing arguments for the persuasive speech.zip In a work of persuasive writing, the writer presents "claims," which are of Henry What if I promised that
More information2 FREE CHOICE The heretical thesis of Hobbes is the orthodox position today. So much is this the case that most of the contemporary literature
Introduction The philosophical controversy about free will and determinism is perennial. Like many perennial controversies, this one involves a tangle of distinct but closely related issues. Thus, the
More informationPortfolio Project. Phil 251A Logic Fall Due: Friday, December 7
Portfolio Project Phil 251A Logic Fall 2012 Due: Friday, December 7 1 Overview The portfolio is a semester-long project that should display your logical prowess applied to real-world arguments. The arguments
More informationCourses providing assessment data PHL 202. Semester/Year
1 Department/Program 2012-2016 Assessment Plan Department: Philosophy Directions: For each department/program student learning outcome, the department will provide an assessment plan, giving detailed information
More informationArgument. What is it? How do I make a good one?
Argument What is it? How do I make a good one? Argument Vs Persuasion Everything s an argument, really. Argument: appeals strictly by reason and logic Persuasion: logic and emotion The forum of your argument
More informationSpeaker Roles POI. Refutation. Equity and Etiquette
AGENDA Speaker Roles POI Refutation Equity and Etiquette BP Basics: Speaker Roles SPEAKER ROLES 1st GOV Prime Minister 1 2 Leader of the Opposition 1st OPP Deputy Leader of the Government 3 4 Deputy Leader
More informationARGUMENT AS INQUIRY: QUESTIONING A TEXT
ARGUMENT AS INQUIRY: QUESTIONING A TEXT Adapted from Reading Rhetorically (A Reader for Writers), 2nd edition by Virginia A. Chappell and Alice M. Gillam and Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings,
More informationUSING LOGOS WISELY. AP Language and Composition
USING LOGOS WISELY AP Language and Composition LOGOS = LOGICAL REASONING Logic is the anatomy of thought - John Locke LOGICAL PROOFS SICDADS S = sign I = induction C = cause D = deduction A = analogy D
More informationGrab an Everything s an Argument book off the shelf by the flags. INTRO TO RHETORIC
Grab an Everything s an Argument book off the shelf by the flags. INTRO TO RHETORIC Everything is an Argument You are bombarded with them all the time! The average American sees over 3000 advertisements
More informationGMAT ANALYTICAL WRITING ASSESSMENT
GMAT ANALYTICAL WRITING ASSESSMENT 30-minute Argument Essay SKILLS TESTED Your ability to articulate complex ideas clearly and effectively Your ability to examine claims and accompanying evidence Your
More informationor did not happen. Some questions of fact are easily answered. These include the many
Chapter 19: The Persuasive Speech Motivational Principles Questions of Fact Questions of fact concern what is or is not true, what does or does not exist, what did or did not happen. Some questions of
More informationPositions 1 and 2 are rarely useful in academic discourse Issues, evidence, underpinning assumptions, context etc. make arguments complex and nuanced
Shaun Theobald S.R.Theobald@kent.ac.uk The Student Learning Advisory Service With any argument, theoretical statement or academic opinion we can adopt 3 positions: 1.Agree 2.Disagree 3.Agree/disagree with
More informationWhat an argument is not
Expectations: As you go through this information on argumentation, you need to take notes in some fashion. You may simply print this document and bring it with you to class. You may also take notes like
More informationLecture 2.1 INTRO TO LOGIC/ ARGUMENTS. Recognize an argument when you see one (in media, articles, people s claims).
TOPIC: You need to be able to: Lecture 2.1 INTRO TO LOGIC/ ARGUMENTS. Recognize an argument when you see one (in media, articles, people s claims). Organize arguments that we read into a proper argument
More informationChp 5. Speakers, Speeches: The British Parliamentary Format
Chp 5 Speakers, Speeches: The British Parliamentary Format Three Ways to Win in B.P. Know things! Talk pretty! Fulfill your role! But first a quick review... Types of Argumentation (Chp 4) Framing Construction
More informationSYSTEMATIC RESEARCH IN PHILOSOPHY. Contents
UNIT 1 SYSTEMATIC RESEARCH IN PHILOSOPHY Contents 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Research in Philosophy 1.3 Philosophical Method 1.4 Tools of Research 1.5 Choosing a Topic 1.1 INTRODUCTION Everyone who seeks knowledge
More informationINJUSTICE ARGUMENT ESSAY
INJUSTICE ARGUMENT ESSAY INTRODUCTION Hook Thesis/ Claim Hooks can include: Relate a dramatic anecdote. Expose a commonly held belief. Present surprising facts and statistics. Use a fitting quotation.
More informationPlantinga, Pluralism and Justified Religious Belief
Plantinga, Pluralism and Justified Religious Belief David Basinger (5850 total words in this text) (705 reads) According to Alvin Plantinga, it has been widely held since the Enlightenment that if theistic
More informationNDT Final Round 2017 Marquis Ard
NDT Final Round 2017 Marquis Ard I want to take a second before I get into my decision to thank the University of Kansas for hosting a wonderful NDT. Getting a chance to enjoy amazing food, even better
More informationCRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODEL PART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTS
Fall 2001 ENGLISH 20 Professor Tanaka CRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODEL PART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTS In this first handout, I would like to simply give you the basic outlines of our critical thinking model
More informationChapter 1. What is Philosophy? Thinking Philosophically About Life
Chapter 1 What is Philosophy? Thinking Philosophically About Life Why Study Philosophy? Defining Philosophy Studying philosophy in a serious and reflective way will change you as a person Philosophy Is
More informationTHE ALLYN & BACON GUIDE TO WRITING
THE ALLYN & BACON GUIDE TO WRITING SEVENTH EDITION JOHN D. RAMAGE, JOHN C. BEAN, AND JUNE JOHNSON PART 2: WRITING PROJECTS CHAPTER 13 WRITING A CLASSICAL ARGUMENT Chapter 13 Learning Objectives In this
More informationRefutation Paragraphs
Refutation Paragraphs The refutation paragraph is normally found ONLY in argument essays and argument research papers; it is also known as the concession paragraph. When students are writing an argumentative
More informationArgumentation Paper Honors/AP Language and Composition English 11
Argumentation Paper Honors/AP Language and Composition English 11 What does an argument essay look like? Read and answer the questions in The Norton Sampler: Short Essays for Composition, chapter for Argument.
More informationLogos, Ethos and Pathos
Logos, Ethos and Pathos Whenever you read an argument you must ask yourself, "is this persuasive? And if so, to whom?" There are seveal ways to appeal to an audience. Among them are appealing to logos,
More informationPastoral Counseling REFORMED THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY DISTANCE EDUCATION
REFORMED THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY DISTANCE EDUCATION Pastoral Counseling Dr. Rod S. Mays 1 Course Overview Table of Contents: Course Overview Grades Required Textbooks Lessons Meet the Professor My View of
More information2PT510 Preaching Lab IB
Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando Campus Fall 2014 August 28 th December 4 th Thursdays 10am-12:00noon in the Chapel Course Syllabus: Instructor: E-mail address: Rev. Kevin R. Collins, D.Min kcollins@rts.edu
More informationWriting the Persuasive Essay
Writing the Persuasive Essay What is a persuasive/argument essay? In persuasive writing, a writer takes a position FOR or AGAINST an issue and writes to convince the reader to believe or do something Persuasive
More informationHow To Trick People Into Giving You Their Money (And Make Them Happy About It)
How To Trick People Into Giving You Their Money (And Make Them Happy About It) WHO AM I... COLIN THERIOT (Rhymes With:) COPYWRITING CRITIQUES Consulting SPEAKING TEACHING MENTORING The Cult of Copy (http://cultofcopy.com)
More informationUnderstanding Truth Scott Soames Précis Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Volume LXV, No. 2, 2002
1 Symposium on Understanding Truth By Scott Soames Précis Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Volume LXV, No. 2, 2002 2 Precis of Understanding Truth Scott Soames Understanding Truth aims to illuminate
More informationSyllabus for PRM 669 Practice Preaching 3 Credit Hours Fall 2013
Syllabus for PRM 669 Practice Preaching 3 Credit Hours Fall 2013 I. COURSE DESCRIPTION A lab course in which students prepare outlines and a manuscript on assigned themes and preach sermons before the
More informationThe Roman empire ended, the Mongol empire ended, the Persian empire ended, the British empire ended, all empires end, and none lasts forever.
BASIC ARGUMENTATION Alfred Snider, University of Vermont World Schools Debate Academy, Slovenia, 2015 Induction, deduction, causation, fallacies INDUCTION Definition: studying a sufficient number of analogous
More informationFROM INQUIRY TO ACADEMIC WRITING CHAPTER 8 FROM ETHOS TO LOGOS: APPEALING TO YOUR READERS
FROM INQUIRY TO ACADEMIC WRITING CHAPTER 8 FROM ETHOS TO LOGOS: APPEALING TO YOUR READERS YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR READERS INFLUENCES HOW YOU SEE A PARTICULAR SITUATION DEFINE AN ISSUE EXPLAIN THE ONGOING
More informationA CRITIQUE OF THE FREE WILL DEFENSE. A Paper. Presented to. Dr. Douglas Blount. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. In Partial Fulfillment
A CRITIQUE OF THE FREE WILL DEFENSE A Paper Presented to Dr. Douglas Blount Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for PHREL 4313 by Billy Marsh October 20,
More information