Making an Argument:
Arguments consist of three parts:
- Assertion: A statement that you are trying to prove with an argument.
Example: Violent videogames should be banned.
- Reasoning: The “because” of the argument, which offers support for your assertion.
Example: Because they desensitize children to violence.
- Evidence: This is the support for your reasoning, using examples, statistics, or scientific information.
Example: Several studies show a direct link between children’s exposure to violent videogames and a tendency to act out violently at school.
There are three debaters per side.
Everyone gives one speech. This is
the order of the speeches:
First proposition constructive
First opposition constructive
Second proposition constructive
Second opposition constructive
First Proposition Constructive (5 minutes): This is the first speech presented in a debate. The first proposition speaker uses this speech to introduce the motion, provide an interpretation of the motion, and outline the major arguments for his or her side. This speech is the foundation for the whole entire debate. During the boxing debate, Chloe advances about five major arguments for her side. Before doing this, he offers an introduction and narrows the definition of ‘boxing.’
? First Opposition Constructive (5 minutes): It is the role of this speaker to both engage arguments from the previous speech and give new arguments to advance the opposition case. It is critical that this speaker engages all information he or she has on their flow sheet. Brandon specifically addresses each argument brought up by the proposition side. At the same time, Brandon advances unique arguments about the merit and safety of boxing.
? Second Proposition Constructive (5 minutes): The nature of this speech resembles the first opposition constructive. This is the last chance for the proposition to introduce new arguments. First, this speaker should give a brief summary of proposition arguments brought up earlier in the debate. Then, the speaker should engage in line-by-line refutation. The speech should end with a relevant conclusion that informs the judge about the major issue of the debate. Chaithra refutes Brandon’s opposition arguments and extends proposition arguments brought up during Chloe’s speech. She adds new examples and analysis about death, crime, and emulation of boxing. She ends the speech with new arguments about the brainwashing effect of boxing on children. She uses the example of Lionel Tate to prove her point.
? Second Opposition Constructive (5 minutes): This is the last chance for the opposition to present new arguments. A second opposition speaker can continue line by line refutation, advance new arguments to the case, add depth to previous arguments, and engage in analysis about which arguments are important, inconsistent, or unimportant to the resolution of the debate. Kevin presents a new argument about the difference between boxing and wresting. In the end, the focus of his speech is about how making boxing an underground sport will create more problems than it solves.
? Opposition Rebuttal (3 minutes): This speaker must identify a few important issues and use these as independent proofs about why the opposition should win. It is impossible to use all points brought up during the debate. No new arguments are allowed at this point in the debate. The speaker should take care that she or he does not simply repeat what was said in the second opposition constructive speech. Valerie identifies about five critical issues and turns them into multiple independent proofs about how the opposition side won those issues and the debate.
? Proposition Rebuttal (3 minutes): This is the final speech in the debate. This speaker should answer arguments brought up in both the second opposition constructive and the opposition rebuttal speeches. Using the critical issues of the debate, the speech should culminate in a few independent proofs about why the proposition side has won the debate. Richard refutes the slew of arguments presented in the final opposition stand. His argumentation culminates with the ongoing theme that was first presented in the beginning of Chloe’s speech: the barbarity and immorality of boxing.