Lincoln/Douglas Debate 101 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 10
About This Presentation

Lincoln/Douglas Debate 101


Lincoln/Douglas Debate 101 My opponent does not exist. He is merely a dissenting voice to the truth which I speak. Melvin B. Tolson Value=an idea or concept that is ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:18
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 11
Provided by: crawford


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Lincoln/Douglas Debate 101

Lincoln/Douglas Debate 101
  • My opponent does not exist. He is merely a
    dissenting voice to the truth which I speak.
  • Melvin B. Tolson

Valuean idea or concept that is worthy of
placing high preference upon moral/ethical p
olitical pragmatic/practical artisticThis is
not debatable.Commonly Used Values UtilityHum
an DignityQuality of LifeSocial
Welfare/Societal GoodEducationJustice/EquityPro
mPrivacySelf DeterminationAnarchy
Value Hierarchydetermination of which value
should be given highest preference in any given
situation. This is where the debate lies. Which
value fits your line of argumentation?Methods
of ComparisonInclusivethe value applying to
all humankind (past and present) is
bestContextualthe value that best fits the
heart of the resolutions dilemmaAdditional
Value Enhancementthe value that enhances other
valuesValue Realizationthe value that
positively affects the most people in a
societyMaslows Hierarchythe value that is more
important/more needed for the human experience
physical needs safety/security belonging
self-esteem self-actualization
Value Criteriaa set of standards by which to
judge the superior worth of the valueCost
Benefit Analysishas the most benefits and the
least harmsUtilitarianismthe greatest happiness
for the greatest number/could create oppressive
majorityFuturismthe greatest good for the
future/life is worth living todayDeontologyrespe
ct for persons decisions must be based on what
is right regardless of the outcomeSocial
Contractman receives benefits of society and has
a responsibility to be of benefit to society
  • The Three Levels of Debate
  • Link the Resolution to the Value
  • a. Derive a value from the resolution
  • b. Prove that the value is important to society
  • II. Value Comparisons
  • Compare your value to your opponents using the
    common methods of evaluation
  • Compare your value to your opponents using the
    rounds criteria
  • The Case
  • a. Establish that affirming or negating the
    resolution causes benefits that enhance the

Oratorical Theory Persuasive Series of
orations Logic over evidence Realistic scenarios
Debate Theory Structured Refutation, Comparison,
and Deliberation of Stock Issues Rapid
delivery Evidence Artificial reality
Constructive Case
  • Determine Value. Link to Resolution. How does
    affirming the resolution produce the value?
  • Choose Criteria.
  • What is the major conflict/common theme?
  • What are the arguments that are major conflict
  • Build a list of arguments-all that you can
  • Organize by grouping similar arguments. Create a
    natural progression of 2-4 main contentions.
  • 1st address value and link
  • 2nd resolution topic-what are the benefits of
    affirming or negating?
  • 3rd why is your value and criteria more
    important and appropriate?
  • Anticipate opposing arguments.
  • Collect evidence.
  • Polish.
  • Write opposing case.

Have case outline and pre-flow!
Roadmap and Signpost!
  • Game Plan
  • Rate
  • Structure
  • Content
  • Rapport

  1. Extend arguments provide new logic, analysis,
    and evidence to further your points and attack
    opposing points.
  2. Launch new attacks with logic, analysis, and
  3. Dont introduce new arguments.
  4. Roadmap and signpost, but dont repeat.
  5. Dont drop points!
  6. Point out opponents dropped points.
  7. Carefully cross-apply arguments.
  8. Filter and group arguments according to
  9. End on a good note rapport and voting issues

Attack oppositions valuecriteriadefinitions
(if needed)case pointsWays to attack
oppositions argumentslimited
applicationlimited time framecontradictionassum
ption of inherent goodunrealisticevidence
validity and credibilityinsignificant
impactsharmsyour arguments are better because
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)