1 3 rd Annual Great Corporate Debate Corporate Team Training Session # 2 June 8 / 10 Stephen Buchanan Education Consulting
2 Outline of Session # 2 Persuasion topics Great Corporate Debate Review Contest, Rules, Judges Criteria, etc. Quick Review of previous session Debate Format and Strategies Teamwork Basic Strategies Affirmative - Negative Constructive - Rebuttal Detailed Format, Timeline of Responsibilities Homework Selection of teams/topics for Session 3 debates Topic A - Topic B - Topic C
3 Training Sessions Schedule June 8 June 10 June 15 June 17
4 Presentation Skills Choose a Persuasion Topic from the list
5 REVIEW Contest, Rules, Judges Criteria, etc See AMCHAM Manual
6 Argument REVIEW Argument, Reasoning Definition Facts/premise + (assumption) Conclusion Reasoning Reasoning is the process of drawing conclusions from facts or premises
7 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
8 Argument, Reasoning and Analysis in Debating Propositions Analysis: Analysis is the process of discovering and understanding all the parts or all the divisions of a subject and their interrelationships. In debate, analysis is the process of discovering the parts of a subject with the goal of studying it to discover the arguments available for influencing others.
9 Argument, Reasoning and Analysis in Debating Propositions GOAL: Understanding the elements of a proposition allow debater to better attack, argue, support & defend it.
10 Argument, Reasoning and Analysis in Debating Propositions 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?
11 Argument, Reasoning and Analysis in Debating Propositions 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?
12 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
13 Research, Preparation and Development of Evidence Types of Evidence Factual Statistical Opinions of Authorities Testimony of Witnesses Documents, legal papers
14 Research, Preparation and Development of Evidence Recording Data Computer (not permitted in the actual debate) Paper Index cards
15 Debate Elements and Format
16 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.
17 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
18 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
19 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 Ethos, Pathos, Logos Clash Topicality Rebuttal 1A (Counterplan) Ethos, Pathos, Logos Close case Prepare opposition block Rebuttal 1N Logos Rebuttal 1A and 2A Defensive arguments (Close case) Logos
20 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
21 Debate Teamwork Team vs. Individuals Each participant has a role Everyone participates and contributes Everyone flows
22 Judging Criteria Knowing the criteria by which you are judged will be the first strategy to effective and successful debating
23 Judging Criteria Criteria from GCD Committee See Handout
24 Judges Evaluations Criteria for winning Formula for winning Strategy for winning BE PREPARED BE PERSUASIVE
25 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
26 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)
27 Debating Strategy The Affirmative and Negative Cases
28 Primary Debate Format & Strategies Affirmative Case First Affirmative Constructive Second Affirmative Constructive First Affirmative Rebuttal Second Affirmative Rebuttal
29 Primary Debate Format & Strategies Negative Case Attacking the Affirmative Case First Negative Constructive Second Negative Constructive First Negative Rebuttal Second Negative Rebuttal
30 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
31 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
32 Debate Strategies The Negative Case Attacking the affirmative case : Basic Attack Disadvantages Counterplan Critiques (K) Topicality
33 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.
34 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.
35 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
36 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: uvm.edu/code/037.html
37 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
38 Detailed Format and Timeline of Responsibilities
39 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.
40 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.
41 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.
42 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.
43 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.
44 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.
45 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."
46 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.
47 Practice Debate Topics are: Euthanasia, in cases of terminal illness, should be legalized in Chile. Night curfews should be established in Chile to reduce juvenile crime. Chile should reduce its military spending by 50% and apply the savings s to Education. Ten percent of municipal government budgets should be applied to the arts. Chile should abolish the mandatory voting system. The Chilean government should not own media companies - TV stations, radio stations and newspapers. Prostitution should be decriminalized in Chile. Uniforms should no longer be mandatory for students in public schools. Chile should join the International Criminal Court. The private lives of everyone, including public figures, should not be open to the media.
48 Practice Debate Which topics 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, B vs. C, and C vs. A
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...
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.firstname.lastname@example.org Attention All Attendees:
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
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
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
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
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
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
A Coach s Notes 1 Everett Rutan Xavier High School email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org Connecticut Debate Association AITE October 15, 2011 Resolved: Connecticut should eliminate the death penalty.
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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,
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
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,
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
Chapter 15 Elements of Argument: Claims and Exceptions Debate is a process in which individuals exchange arguments about controversial topics. Debate could not exist without arguments. Arguments are the
Writing Workshop We must clean up toxic waste now! Vote for me! My client is innocent! When an issue affects you deeply, you want to convince others to agree with you. Expressing your thoughts on a topic
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
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
I. COURSE DESCRIPTION Syllabus for GTHE 763 The Biblical Doctrine of Grace 3 Credit Hours Spring 2014 Studies the Biblical, historical, theological, and practical dimensions of the doctrine of grace, which
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
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
The Art of Persuasive Writing Forms of Persuasive Writing Advertisements Editorials Speeches Propaganda Reviews Blogs Persuasive Essays Forms of Persuasive Writing Advertisements try to convince you to
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
AP Language and Composition Test: The Synthesis Essay Recap Question 1 Reminder: A. You do not have to use all of the sources; however, use a minimum of three! B. You must cite your sources! You may simply
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
Syllabus for PRM 669 Practice Preaching 3 Credit Hours Spring 2017 I. COURSE DESCRIPTION A lab course in which students prepare outlines and a manuscript on assigned themes and preach sermons before the
GUIDE FOR BEGINNING A LOCAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE MINISTRY Written by Charles Jones Assisted by Neron Smith Men s Ministry Department Mississippi Baptist Convention Board Revised Edition 1 INTRODUCTION Many
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
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
A. READING / LITERATURE Content Standard Students in Wisconsin will read and respond to a wide range of writing to build an understanding of written materials, of themselves, and of others. Rationale Reading
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
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
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
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,
FOUR WAYS OF KNOWING (Justifiable True Belief) 1. Sensory input; 2. Authoritative knowledge; 3. Logic and reason; 4. Faith and intuition Argumentative Fallacies The Logic of Writing and Debate from http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html
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
The Art of Persuasive Writing Forms of Persuasive Writing Advertisements Editorials Speeches Propaganda Reviews Blogs Persuasive Essays Forms of Persuasive Writing Advertisements try to convince you to
Thank You for Arguing: What Aristotle, Lincoln and Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion Author: Jay Heinrichs One of my father s favorite games when my siblings and I were young was to
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.
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
The Philosopher s World Cup Monty Python & the Flying Circus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92vv3qgagck&feature=related What is an argument? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqfkti6gn9y What is an argument?