Pros And Cons - Sociedade De Debates Da Católica Porto

INTRODUCTIONHow can Pros and Cons help you to debate?To debate well you need:1 to have a range of good arguments and rebuttals2 to develop these in a clear, detailed and analytical way3 to deliver them persuasively.Pros and Cons can help you with the first, and only the first, of these three. If you wereto read out one side of a pros and cons article, it would not fill even the shortest ofdebate speeches. Each point is designed to express the idea, but you will need to fleshit out. If you know your topic in advance, you will be able to use these points as aspringboard for your own research. If you are in an impromptu debate, you will have torely on your own knowledge and ideas to populate the argument with up-to-dateexamples, detailed analysis and vivid analogies. But the ideas themselves can be useful.It is hard to know something about everything and yet debating competitions expectyou to. It is important to read widely and follow current affairs, but doing that does notguarantee that you will not get caught out by a debate on indigenous languages, nuclearenergy or taxation. Pros and Cons can be a useful safety net in those situations.When using each article it is worth considering:A Does each point stand up as a constructive argument in its own right, or is it onlyreally strong as a rebuttal to its equivalent point on the other side? Where there arekey points which directly clash, they have been placed opposite each other, but somepoints have been used to counter an argument rather than as a positive reason forone side of the case.

2INTRODUCTIONB Can the points be merged or split? Different debate formats favour different numbersof arguments. Check to see if two of the points here could be joined into a largerpoint. Or if you need quantity, sub-points could be repackaged as distinct arguments.If you are delivering an extension in a World Universities-style debate (or a BritishParliament-style one), it is worth noting down the sub-points. It is possible that thetop half of the table may make an economic argument, but have they hit all three ofthe smaller economic points? If they have not, then one of these, correctly labelled,could form your main extension.C Look at Pros and Cons last, not first.Try to brainstorm your own arguments first andthen check the chapter to see if there is anything there you had not thought of.Thearticles are not comprehensive and often not surprising (especially if the other teamsalso have the book!), so it is best not to rely on it too heavily. Also, if you do notpractise generating points yourself, what will you do when the motion announcedis not in here?D Adapt the arguments here to the jurisdiction in which you are debating.The bookis designed to be more international than its predecessor, but the writers are Britishand that bias will come through.The debate within your own country may have itsown intricacies which are not reflected in the broader global debate. Some arguments are based on assumptions of liberal democracy and other values and systemswhich may just be plain wrong where you live.E Is the argument or the example out of date? We have tried to write broad argumentswhich will stand the test of time, but the world changes. Do not believe everythingyou read here if you know or suspect it to be untrue! Things like whether somethingis legal or illegal in a given country change very quickly, so please do your research.F What is the most effective order of arguments? This book lists points, but that is notthe same as a debating case.You will need to think about how to order arguments,how to divide them between speakers, and how to label them as well as how muchtime to give to each. On the opposition in particular, some of the most significantpoints could be towards the end of the list.Debating formatsThere is an almost bewildering number of debate formats across the world.The numberof speakers, the length and order of speeches, the role of the audience and opportunitiesfor interruption and questioning all vary. So too do the judging criteria. On one sideof the spectrum, some formats place so much emphasis on content and strategy that thedebaters speak faster than most people can follow. On the other side, persuasive rhetoricand witty repartee can be valued more than logical analysis and examples. Most debateformats sit in the middle of this divide and give credit for content, style and strategy.Here are a few debate formats used in the English-Speaking Union programmes:

INTRODUCTION3Mace formatThis format involves two teams with two speakers on each side. Each speaker deliversa seven-minute speech and there is then a floor debate, where members of the audiencemake brief points, before one speaker on each team delivers a four-minute summaryspeech with the opposition team speaking first.The order is as follows:First Proposition SpeakerFirst Opposition SpeakerSecond Proposition SpeakerSecond Opposition SpeakerFloor DebateOpposition Summary SpeakerProposition Summary SpeakerThe first Proposition Speaker should define the debate. This does not mean givingdictionary definitions of every word, but rather explaining the terms so that everybodyis clear exactly what the debate is about. For example, the speaker may need to clarifywhether the law which is being debated should be passed just in their country or allaround the world and specify any exemptions or limits.This speaker should then outlinetheir side’s arguments and go through the first, usually two or three, points in detail.The first Opposition speaker should clarify the Opposition position in the debate;e.g. are they putting forward a counter-proposal or supporting the status quo? Theyshould then outline their side’s case, rebut the arguments put forward by the firstProposition Speaker and explain their team’s first few arguments.The second speakers on both sides should rebut the arguments which have comefrom the other team, support the points put forward by their first speakers, if they havebeen attacked, and then add at least one completely new point to the debate. It is notenough simply to expand on the arguments of the first speaker.The summary speakers must remind the audience of the key points in the debateand try to convince them that they have been more persuasive in these areas than theiropponents.The summary speakers should respond to points from the floor debate (andin the case of the Proposition team, to the second Opposition speech), but they shouldnot add any new arguments to the debate at this stage.Points of informationIn this format, points of information (POIs) are allowed during the first four speechesbut not in the summary speeches. The first and last minute of speeches are protectedfrom these and a timekeeper should make an audible signal such as a bell ringing or aknock after one minute and at six minutes, as well as two at the end of the speech toindicate that the time is up.To offer point of information to the other team, a speakershould stand up and say ‘on a point of information’ or ‘on that point’.They must thenwait to see if the speaker who is delivering their speech will say ‘accepted’ or ‘declined’.

4INTRODUCTIONIf declined, the offerer must sit down and try again later. If accepted, they make a shortpoint and then must sit down again and allow the main speaker to answer the point andcarry on with their speech. All speakers should offer points of information, but shouldbe sensitive not to offer so many that they are seen as barracking the speaker who hasthe floor.A speaker is recommended to take two points of information during a sevenminute speech and will be rewarded for accepting and answering these points.RebuttalApart from the very first speech in the debate, all speakers are expected to rebut thepoints which have come before them from the opposing team.This means listening towhat the speaker has said and then explaining in your speech why their points arewrong, irrelevant, insignificant, dangerous, immoral, contradictory, or adducing anyother grounds on which they can be undermined. It is not simply putting forwardarguments against the motion – this is the constructive material – it is countering thespecific arguments which have been put forward.As a speaker, you can think before thedebate about what points may come up and prepare rebuttals to them, but be carefulnot to pre-empt arguments (the other side may not have thought of them) and makesure you listen carefully and rebut what the speaker actually says, not what you thoughtthey would. However much you prepare, you will have to think on your feet.The mace format awards points equally in four categories: reasoning and evidence,listening and responding, expression and delivery, and organisation and prioritisation.LDC formatThe LDC format was devised for the London Debate Challenge and is now widelyused with younger students and for classroom debating at all levels. It has two teams ofthree speakers each of whom speaks for five minutes (or three or four with younger ornovice debaters).For the order of speeches, the rules on points of information and the judging criteria,please see the section on the mace format’. The only differences are the shorter (andequal) length of speeches and the fact that the summary speech is delivered by a thirdspeaker rather than by a speaker who has already delivered a main speech.This allowsmore speakers to be involved.World Schools Debating Championships (WSDC) styleThis format is used at the World Schools Debating Championships and is alsocommonly used in the domestic circuits of many countries around the world. It consistsof two teams of three speakers all of whom deliver a main eight-minute speech. Onespeaker also delivers a four-minute reply speech.There is no floor debate.The order isas follows:

INTRODUCTION5First Proposition SpeakerFirst Opposition SpeakerSecond Proposition SpeakerSecond Opposition SpeakerThird Proposition SpeakerThird Opposition SpeakerOpposition Reply SpeechProposition Reply SpeechFor the roles of the first two speakers on each side, see the section on ‘the mace format’,above.The WSDC format also has a third main speech:Third speakersThird speakers on both sides need to address the arguments and the rebuttals putforward by the opposing team.Their aim should be to strengthen the arguments theirteam mates have put forward, weaken the Opposition and show why their case is stillstanding at the end of the debate.The rules allow the third Proposition, but not the thirdOpposition speaker to add a small point of their own, but in practice, many teams preferto spend the time on rebuttal. Both speakers will certainly want to add new analysis andpossibly new examples to reinforce their case.Reply speakersThe reply speeches are a chance to reflect on the debate, albeit in a biased way. Thespeaker should package what has happened in the debate in such a way as to convincethe audience, and the judges, that in the three main speeches, their side of the debatecame through as the more persuasive. It should not contain new material, with theexception that the Proposition reply speech may need some new rebuttal after the thirdOpposition speech.Points of information are allowed in this format in the three main speeches, butnot in the reply speeches. The first and last minute of the main speeches are protected. For more information on points of information, see the section on ‘ the maceformat’.The judging criteria for the WSDC format is 40 per cent content, 40 per cent styleand 20 per cent strategy.The main features of the format as practised at the World Schools DebatingChampionships are: The debate should be approached from a global perspective.The definition shouldbe global with only necessary exceptions.The examples should be global.The arguments should consider how the debate may be different in countries that are, forexample, more or less economically developed or more or less democratic. The motions should be debated at the level of generality in which they have beenworded. In some formats, it is acceptable to narrow down a motion to one example

6INTRODUCTIONof the principle, but at WSDC, you are expected to give multiple examples of a widetopic if it is phrased widely. The WSDC format gives 40 per cent of its marks to style which is more than manydomestic circuits. This means that speakers should slow down (if they are used toracing), think about their language choice and make an effort to be engaging in theirdelivery.World Universities/British Parliamentary styleThis format is quite different to the three described so far. It is one of the mostcommonly used formats at university level (the World Universities DebatingChampionships use it), and it is widely used in schools’ competitions hosted byuniversities in the UK.It consists of four teams of two: two teams on each side of the motion.The teams onthe same side must agree with each other, but debate better than the other teams onthe same side in order to win.The teams do not prepare together. At university level,speeches are usually seven minutes long, whereas at school level, they are commonlyfive minutes. Points of information are allowed in all eight speeches and the first andlast minute of each speech is protected from them (for more on points of information,see the section on ‘the mace format’.The speeches are often given parliamentary namesand the order of speeches is as follows:Opening GovernmentPrime MinisterOpening OppositionLeader of the OppositionDeputy Prime MinisterDeputy Leader of the OppositionClosing GovernmentMember of the GovernmentGovernment WhipClosing OppositionMember of the OppositionOpposition WhipThe speaking order in the World Universities or British Parliamentary debate format.For the roles of the first two speakers on both sides, see the section on ‘the mace format’.The roles of the closing teams are as follows:Members of the government (third speakers on each side)The third speaker should do substantial rebuttal to what has come before them in thedebate if needed.They are also required to move the debate forward with at least one

INTRODUCTION7new argument which is sometimes called an ‘extension’.The closing team should notcontradict the opening team, but neither can they simply repeat their arguments, havinghad more time to think about how to put them persuasively.Whips (fourth speakers on each side)The whips deliver summary speeches.They should not offer new arguments, but theycan (and should) offer new rebuttal and analysis as they synthesise the debate. Theyshould summarise all the key points on their team and try to emphasise why theirpartner’s contribution has been particularly significant.Debating in the classroomTeachers should use or invent any format which suits their lessons. Speech length andthe number of speakers can vary, as long as they are equal on both sides. The LDCformat explained here is often an effective one in the classroom. Points of informationcan be used or discarded as wanted and the floor debate could be replaced with aquestion and answer session. Students can be used as the chairperson and timekeeperand the rest of the class can be involved through the floor debate and audience vote. Ifmore class participation is needed, then students could be given peer assessment sheetsto fill in as the debate goes on, or they could be journalists who will have to write upan article on the debate for homework.In the language classroom or with younger pupils, teachers may be free to pick anytopic, as the point of the exercise will be to develop the students’ speaking and listeningskills. Debates, however, can also be a useful teaching tool for delivering content andunderstanding across the curriculum. Science classrooms could host debates on geneticsor nuclear energy; literature lessons can be enhanced with textual debates; geographyteachers could choose topics on the environment or globalisation.When assessing thedebate, the teacher will need to decide how much, if any, emphasis they are giving tothe debating skills of the student and how much to the knowledge and understandingof the topic shown.In addition to full-length debates, teachers may find it useful to use the topics in thisbook (and others they generate) for ‘hat’ debates.Write topics out and put them in ahat. Choose two students and invite them to pick out a topic which they then speak onfor a minute each. Or for a variation, let them play ‘rebuttal tennis’ where they knockpoints back and forth to each other.This can be a good way to get large numbers ofstudents speaking and can be an engaging starter activity, to introduce a new topic orto review student learning.

This page intentionally left blank

SECTION APhilosophy/political theory

This page intentionally left blank

ANARCHISM11AnarchismLike many of the views in this chapter, anarchism does not represent a singular orcomprehensive ideological position, but a family of competing ones. The commonthread that unites anarchist theories is a belief in the unjustifiability of the state and itsauthority over us. For example, some anarchists argue against the state on the groundsthat its authority is not consented to, or that it produces worse outcomes for its citizens,or it unacceptably imposes the values or interests of a certain group upon all citizens ofthe state. Notably, anarchism can co-exist with many other philosophical positions. Forinstance, there are ‘anarcho-capitalists’, who believe that the absence of a state ensures apurer operation of the capitalist system with a truly free market. On the other hand,‘anarcho-socialists’ believe that mutual co-operation is a naturally arising result in astateless world, and will in fact bring about greater equality than any state mechanismcould provide.ProsCons[1] Many anarchists’ central claim is this:not everyone who must live under thestate consents to it, and it is therefore anunacceptable curtailment of that individual’s natural autonomy. Natural autonomymatters, because individuals need to maketheir own moral decisions, or becausethey are entitled to pursue their own selfinterest. The state is no more than arandomly selected group of people whichpurports to be entitled to make thosedecisions for us, when in fact,

Pros and Cons Pros and Cons:A Debater's Handbook offers an indispensable guide to the arguments both for and against over 140 current controversies and global issues. The nineteenth edition includes new entries on topics such as the right to possess nuclear weapons, the bailing out of failing companies, the protection of indigenous