Content

• To step
• Method 1 of 2: Match debating in a team
• Method 2 of 2: Friendly debating in the form of an informal discussion
• Tips

Debating can be done in many different ways. On television you have probably seen a part of the debates in the House of Representatives and everyone knows from birthdays or from the cafe of course the old-fashioned, friendly discussions, which may or may not be about politics. But did you know that there is also, for example, an Australian-Asian form of debate? Sometimes during a debate you defend a proposition on your own, but you can also debate in a team. In this article, we've listed basic debating facts for you, and we'll also explain how you can improve your debating skills.

To step

Method 1 of 2: Match debating in a team

1. A match debate is an official debate in which you, alone or as a team, are presented with a proposition to debate. You do not choose the subject yourself. One team is "for" the statement and the other team is "against". The participants who agree with the statement are called the proponents, and the participants who disagree with the statement are called the opponents.
   • The teams sit at the front of the room where the debate is being held. Usually the supporters are on the left and the opponents on the right.
   • After the chairman has opened the debate, it is the turn of the first speaker. Usually one of the proponents is given the floor first, then one of the opponents, then one of the proponents, and so on.
2. When you speak first, you sometimes have to define the thesis first. On a topic like "The death penalty is a just and effective punishment," it is probably clear what the debate is about, but not a topic like "Happiness is more noble than wisdom." In that case, it's a good idea to define the topic first.
   • Proponents are always given the first (and best) chance to define the topic. The task of the first speaker to defend the thesis is to explain what the "common man" thinks about it. test:
     
     • How would an average person on the street define the subject? Is it reasonable to expect a "normal" person to view the subject in a certain way?
   • Subsequently, the opponents are given the opportunity to refute the definition (this is also referred to as “challenging” the definition) and propose a different definition, but only if the definition of the positive party is unreasonable or the opponents are in an impossible position. The first speaker to disagree with the statement must first refute the proponents' definition before he or she can challenge the definition.
3. Make sure your argument is no longer than the time limit set for the debate (usually 7 minutes). Depending on the position you are defending, you have to follow a certain protocol; for example, you have to define the topic or present the main argument.
   • Support your opinion / statement. If you say "I don't think the death penalty should be reintroduced," you should also be able to show why you think that.
   • Use religion only when appropriate. Just because something is written in the Bible, the Torah or the Quran does not mean that it is therefore a suitable source to support your argument with, because not everyone considers the content of those sources to be the truth.
   • If you really don't know something, you better not argue about it, but sometimes you don't have a choice. Even if you have to argue for or against a proposition that you don't know much about, you can at least try it. Try to come up with vague, ambiguous information so that your opponents will find it difficult to refute your arguments in any way. After all, if they don't understand it, they can't argue with it. Probably the chairman will not understand exactly what you mean, but making an attempt is always better than saying "Sorry, I don't know anything about it so I'm giving away this round to the opponents."
   • Don't use rhetorical questions. Always give a clear answer to every question you ask. An open-ended question gives your opponents room to refute your argument.
4. Present your argument. When it is your turn, you may present your argument. Speak with passion - with a monotonous voice it is more difficult to hold the audience's attention, so people may just miss the main thrust of your argument. Talk slowly, loudly, and clearly.
   • Make sure you have eye contact with the chairman. You may of course look at your opponents from time to time, but you are supposed to address your argument to the chairman, as he chooses the winners.
   • Before presenting your argument, briefly explain how it is constructed. That way, the people in the audience know what to expect and the chairman won't interrupt you unless you really talk much longer than the prescribed time limit.
5. Try to find a middle ground between presenting your team's point of view or positions and contradicting the point of view of the opponents. The teams take turns to debate, so unless you are the first defensive speaker, you can always try to disprove your opponents' arguments. For example, the structure of a debate can look like this:
   • First proponent:
     
     • (Possibly) define the topic and present the main argument of the team.
     • Briefly describe what each of the proponents is talking about.
     • Present the first part of the proponents' argument.
   • First opponent:
     
     • Adopt or reject the definition (if any) and present the team's main argument.
     • Briefly describe what each of the opponents will be talking about.
     • Present a counter-argument to some of the arguments mentioned by the first proponent.
     • Present the first part of the opponents' argument.
   • Second advocates:
     
     • Reaffirm the main argument of the proponents.
     • Present a counter-argument to some of the arguments mentioned by the first opponents.
     • Present the second part of the proponents' argument.
   • Second opponent:
     
     • Reaffirm the main argument of the opponents.
     • Present a counter-argument to some of the arguments mentioned by the second proponent.
     • Present the second part of the proponents' argument.
   • Third advocate:
     
     • Reaffirm the main argument of the proponents.
     • Present a counter-argument to one of the remaining arguments of the opponents.
     • Summarize the arguments of the proponents.
     • Closing the debate of the proponents.
   • Third opponent:
     
     • Reaffirm the main argument of the opponents.
     • Present a counter-argument to one of the remaining arguments of the proponents.
     • Summarize the arguments of the opponents.
     • Closing the debate of the opponents.
6. Certain rules apply to the presentation of counter-arguments. If you want to present a counter-argument to a particular argument from the other team, you must adhere to the following three rules:
   • Provide evidence for your counter argument. Mere assertion that what the opposing party is saying is incorrect is not enough. You should not only tell the chairman that something is wrong with the argument of the opposing party, you should also be able to do it demonstrate.
   • Get the fundamentals out of your opponents' argument. There is little point in criticizing an insignificant detail of their argument. Attack them at the core of their argument and take it down with surgical precision.
   • Avoid committing a so-called argumentum ad hominem. When you commit an argumentum ad hominem, you are criticizing the person instead of his or her ideas. You shouldn't attack the person, but his or her idea.
7. Use all of your time (or at least almost all of your time). The more you talk, the more likely you are to convince the chairman that you are right. Of course, this does not mean that you just have to keep talking endlessly. Try to give as many examples as possible. The more the chairman gets to hear about why you are right, the more likely he or she will believe you.
8. If possible, make sure you know which aspects of the debate you will be judged on. Usually the following aspects of a debate are assessed: content, manner and method.
   • Content:
     • The amount of evidence. How much evidence does the speaker provide to support his or her claim?
     • The relevance of the evidence. To what extent does the evidence adduced support the argument?
   • The way:
     • Eye contact. How well does the speaker manage to hold the audience's attention and engage the audience in his or her speech? Is the speaker looking at his or her notes too often and for too long?
     • Vote.To what extent does the speaker's voice support his or her argument? Does the speaker vary the strength, pitch, and rhythm of his or her voice to emphasize important parts of the story?
     • Body language. Does the speaker use body language to emphasize arguments and to appear calm and confident?
     • Nervous traits. How well is the speaker able to suppress or avoid certain verbal and physical tics (such as stuttering, pacing or fidgeting or playing with something)?
     • Eloquence. Does the speaker pronounce all words clearly? Is the speaker using the words, or are the words using the speaker?
   • The method:
     • Team connection (Cohesion within the team). How is the organization of the arguments and counter-arguments within the team? Do the various arguments and counter-arguments complement each other and do they form a logical whole? Is there one clear and consistent line of thought within the team?
     • Individual competence. To what extent does each individual speaker excel in debating? Does each speaker clearly indicate where a particular argument ends and another argument begins?

Method 2 of 2: Friendly debating in the form of an informal discussion

1. Determine the statement step by step by asking questions. In an informal debate you never know exactly what position the other person will take or what opinion he or she actually holds. Therefore, ask questions to define the precise topic of the debate.
   • "Do you believe that the missing links in the theory of evolution say something about Darwinism?"
   • "Do you have an opinion on the" nature-nurture debate "?"
   • "How do you actually think about positive discrimination?"
2. Try to understand the other person's point of view or ask for an explanation if certain points within his or her point of view are not completely clear. Nobody has a perfectly coherent worldview, but debating with someone who has completely incoherent ideas is very difficult. Kindly ask if the other person can stick to one particular, more or less consistent, line of arguments.
   • If you are not entirely clear what the other person's argument is about, you can help him or her a little in a non-threatening way: "So if I understand correctly, do you think that the cent should be abolished because the value of a cent is lower than the cost of production?"
3. Present your counter argument. By first asking your opponent to clarify his or her argument and only then to come up with your counter-argument, you keep the discussion friendly, while it still remains a debate.
   • As you defend your position, also give examples that show why you believe in a particular position:
     
     • "That's how I think about it: I think that too often people try to be politically correct and that has made us afraid to say everything and rather keep our mouths shut. Instead of saying how we really think about something, we say something. we think other people want to hear. We think it's more important not to offend others than to tell the truth. "
4. Provide evidence to the contrary for the other person's argument. First set out your counter-argument and then provide as much counter-evidence as you can think of.
   • "Does it really make sense to say that all municipalities and the government should control sexual morality? The question is not whether they could" do it - they are probably quite capable of it; the question is whether they can. " right is that they tell us how to behave physically in our own home. How far will they go if we give them permission to take one step over the threshold with us? Wouldn't that be an invitation for rulers to judge and rule more and more areas of our private life? How long will we remain in charge of our own lives? "
5. Respond to any counter-arguments the other person mentions. The person you argue with is likely trying to refute certain things you say. Memorize the counter-proofs the other mentions and take them down once your opponent has finished talking.
6. There are also certain (unwritten) rules for informal debates. Try to take that into account. For example, always be nice to the other person, even if you are debating with that person. Also keep the following in mind:
   • Don't try to “win” the discussion by using force to show that you are right. It is a debate, which means that it is a fluid exchange of ideas, and not a yes-no discussion where one is right and the other is not.
   • Always assume that the other person means well. It may happen that your opponent scatters once, or that the discussion suddenly gets high unintentionally. It is best to assume that the other person has argued with you with the idea of ​​socializing and not insulting or attacking you.
   • Never raise your voice or let the discussion get heated. Try not to get caught up in a debate where you no longer keep your cool. A debate must be civilized and light-hearted. You are not supposed to intimidate or try to talk under the table.
7. Don't keep repeating the same arguments over and over. Sometimes a debate turns into something and then it just keeps going because neither side wants to admit that he or she has lost. If you get into such an endless debate, don't go through with it. Just say: "I respect your opinion. I disagree with you, but I might at some point in the future. Give me a moment to think about it, okay?"
8. End the debate in a friendly manner. Nobody will want to argue with you if you can't stand your loss or if you don't respect your opponent. No matter how high the emotions have run during the debate, always try to end the debate in a nice way. You can disagree with someone, but that doesn't mean you can't be friends.

Tips

• When the chairman says it is your turn, you must be ready to speak immediately, or within five seconds at the most.
• Try to practice as often as possible so that you become more accustomed to debating and discussing and to the atmosphere that goes with it.
• At the end of the debate, first thank your opponent (s), then the moderator and the chairman, then the timekeeper and finally the audience.
• Study past debates. It can be very useful to study previously held debates, but you should never take the arguments from a previously held debate literally.
• Apart from the aforementioned rules, there are actually no rules for debating that are set in black and white. Do whatever seems best to you at the time. If you want to give a hundred arguments, do that. If you only want to make one statement and discuss it throughout the debate, you can. There is no "right" or "wrong" here.
• One minute before the end of the prescribed time, the bell will ring once, on the time limit it will ring twice and thirty seconds after the time limit has expired the bell will ring three times.
• Never argue with the chairman.
• Instead, simplify your argument. If you use all kinds of expensive, difficult words to formulate your argument, the chairman will only get a bad impression of you, so that makes no sense.