Pay attention to rhetoric and debate etiquette
1. Debatetors should behave in a competition, even if they are tit-for-tat in the debate, they should be gentle and polite. , convince people with reason instead of overwhelming them with force.
2. During the debate, it is required to use Mandarin, speak clearly, have clear views, and respect each other. You can only attack the other party's views and reasons, but not the other party's position and character (personal attacks are not allowed) , cannot contain language that despises, belittles or insults the other party)
3. During the debate, especially one-on-one defense and free debate, you must answer the other party’s questions and rebuttals during the debate. , especially in one-on-one defense and free debate, you must answer or refute the other party's questions and arguments. The content cannot deviate from the topic of the debate or fight independently, and must reflect the confrontational nature of the competition.
Contestants participating in the debate for the first time should be prepared before the competition
? The debate is a favorite competition of many young comrades. It focuses on people’s oral expressions. ability. However, although many young people, especially some young students, are very enthusiastic about participating, they suffer setbacks on the battlefield for the first time due to lack of certain debate knowledge, or do not know how to prepare before the game, or do not want to lead during the game. . Therefore, it is very necessary for beginners to master some basic debate knowledge. So, what preparations should a team member make before participating in a debate competition for the first time? There are four main items: understanding preparation, examination preparation, thesis preparation and trial defense preparation.
1. Understanding and preparation
The so-called understanding and preparation means that the team members must have a certain understanding of the nature and characteristics of the "debate competition" before the competition. Debate competition is a mock debate (i.e. debate practice) that we conduct in the form of a competition. This kind of debate often does not ask the debaters' own positions and opinions, but focuses on the competition of people's debating skills. Neither party is prepared to convince the other or be convinced by the other, but rather defeat the other by contradicting the other, winning the judges' judgment and the audience's reaction. Therefore, this kind of competition has the following three characteristics:
1. The topic of the debate, the procedure of the debate, and the time of the speech are all decided by the organizer of the debate competition. Participants must debate according to regulations and cannot be arbitrary. Change.
2. The criteria for winning the competition include arguments, materials, rhetoric, demeanor, adaptability and other comprehensive factors, which are determined by the judges based on standards and subjective impressions.
3. Debates can only attack the other party’s views and reasons, but not the other party’s position and character. If beginners understand these properties and characteristics of debate, they will not be confused by daily arguments during competitions, and their ideas and methods will not be confused.
2. Inspection Preparation
3. Argument Preparation
After the debate topic is clearly determined, the contestants can make the same decision based on the topic. Discuss and research to establish a specific general argument that is most beneficial to our argument. The so-called most beneficial to our side means that the general argument is not only correct and clear, but can also be used to defeat any of the other party's arguments and to resist any of the other party's attacks. Whether you can establish such a general argument is the key to the success or failure of debate preparations. To establish such a general argument, you must first strictly examine the topic, that is, analyze the concepts of each word or phrase in the topic one by one, which is commonly known as "breaking the topic." This kind of analysis must be based on the standpoints of both pros and cons, and cannot be based on wishful thinking. In particular, it is necessary to analyze which words or sentences of the opponent's debater have potential favorable factors, which may become the focus of the debate between the two sides, because generally both sides of the debate will focus on the interpretation of a certain word in the topic to start the argument, and sometimes the entire debate will appear. The debate always revolves around interpretation. Therefore, it is extremely important to try to stand on a certain theoretical level and define the debate topic in a way that is beneficial to your own point of view, so as to gain "recognition" from the majority of the audience. In addition, the preparation of the graduation thesis should not be regarded as an isolated and static preparation, but should be reviewed at any time during the subsequent defense writing and trial defense process. and any omissions in the strategic and tactical design so that they can be corrected in a timely manner.
After the defense statements are prepared, the defenders can divide their work to write their respective defense statements.
4. Trial debate preparation
Similar to other competitions, if the debate team wants to win the official competition, it must conduct a trial debate before the official competition to test its pre-competition skills. Whether the preparation can stand the actual test. In order to achieve the test effect, the conditions and atmosphere of the trial debate must be as realistic as possible. This requires the formal team members to have a team of comparable strength to cooperate while entering the preparation stage. Assuming that the "opposite party" also enters the preparation stage, both parties must be in the " Confidential" status. Both parties shall be in a state of "confidentiality". However, in order to increase the difficulty for some official team members, the official team members should deliberately leak some key points of argumentation to attract the "imaginary opponent" to prepare for targeted attacks. This will test whether the argumentation capabilities and strategies and tactics of both parties can be effective during the trial defense. Another purpose of the court debate is to allow the contestants to get into character. As mentioned before, the biggest feature of the debate is that the opinions expressed in the debate are not necessarily consistent with the original opinions of the debaters. Just like some actors' own personalities are inconsistent with the characters in the play, it takes in-depth life and in-depth practice to enter the role. . During the competition, the debate process not only shows the sharpness of the paper, but also the performance of the debate style, attitude and other aspects. Through the trial debate, the contestants can often be able to fully stand on the concept of the debate topic not only theoretically, but also emotionally. Only in this way can we realistically show the appearance of a debater who is righteous, impassioned, confident and argumentative. For preliminary contestants, the trial debate can also be used to hone their courage and develop on-the-spot experience. The trial defense should generally be held one or two days before the official competition. This is similar to a pre-game warm-up to keep the players in the best competitive condition.
Two basic principles for establishing positions
(1) Weaken our claims and strengthen the other party’s claims. To establish a position, we must not only establish our understanding of the topic, but also limit the other party's understanding of the topic. That is, we must clearly point out the arguments that the other party should demonstrate. Expand the scope of our argument as much as possible, thereby leaving us with greater room for maneuver. For example, in the 1986 Asian College Debate Competition between the Chinese University of Hong Kong team and the Peking University team, the debate topic was "The benefits of developing tourism outweigh the disadvantages." The Peking University team was on the negative side, while the Chinese University team on the positive side cited many examples to prove that Many countries have achieved success in developing tourism because they have certain conditions. The Peking University team immediately pointed out that Zhengfang's position was not that the benefits of developing tourism outweigh the disadvantages "under certain conditions", so the CUHK team let it slip. This actually requires the affirmative side to prove that "under any circumstances" the benefits of developing tourism outweigh the disadvantages. Of course, the affirmative side has no way to argue and is in a passive position.
(2) Try to choose a position that is logical and difficult to be attacked. The main method is "high theory". If we get entangled with the other party in any detail, we will often lose our advantage, and in the end it will still be a "confused account"; it is better to simply affirm some obvious facts and well-known opinions, and then point out immediately: these are just One aspect of the problem, and what we should be discussing is something more important, raising the argument to a higher level so that the other party's carefully prepared materials cannot be played against the other party on a position we are familiar with. We are familiar with positional warfare, with a high position and overwhelming power. It must be both "unexpected" and "reasonable". This requires coaches and team members to carefully think and consider the debate topic, and strive to make their positions not only impeccable and solid, but also have novel viewpoints, catching the other party off guard, and making themselves invincible.
The original meaning of "the guest and the host enjoy themselves" is: the guest in turn becomes the host. The metaphor changes from passive to active. In debate competitions, passivity is a common disadvantage and often a precursor to failure. He said that the focus of debate is to turn from passive to active in debate. Below, this article attempts to introduce to you several techniques that mainly focus on counter-customers by combining the theory of techniques with the analysis of practical examples.
1. Use strength to gain strength?
There is a move in martial arts novels called "borrowing force to fight", which means that a person with strong internal strength can borrow the opponent's attack to counterattack the opponent. This method can also be used in debates.
For example, in the debate about "Knowing the law is easier than doing it", there is a round like this:?
When the other party uses the example of "Knowing the law is easier than obeying the law" to argue that "Knowing the law is easier than doing it" When the situation is "difficult", the advocate immediately changes from the point of view of "knowing the law is not easy" to strengthen his own point of view and give the opponent a powerful counterattack.
The affirmative side: "It is difficult to know the law" received a powerful counterattack in the opponent's rebuttal; the counterargument: "It is difficult to know the method" and received a powerful counterattack in the opponent's rebuttal.
Positive side: Yes! It is precisely because of those who meet the executioner's end that they realize the power of the law. The dignity of the law can be said to be "retreating when faced with difficulties." The other party recognizes the friend! (Warm applause)?
Secondly, flowers and trees?
Cut out the flaws in the other party’s arguments and replace them with viewpoints or materials that are beneficial to our side, which can often have the miraculous effect of "making a big difference". We liken this approach to "transferring flowers and grafting new ideas onto others."
Give me an example. In the defense of "knowing is difficult, doing is easy", there was such an example: ?
Contrary: The ancients said that "the road to Shu is difficult, it is difficult to climb to the sky", which means that the road to Shu is difficult to walk, and "walking" means "Okay"! If "doing" is not difficult, why not call it "Sun Zhi"?
Positive: Sun Dasheng’s nickname is Sun Walker, but does the other party know that his name is Sun Wukong? Are "wu" and "之" the same pronunciation?
This is a good example of "filling in the blanks". The other party's example seems reasonable, but in fact it is a bit far-fetched: rejecting on the grounds of "Why not Sun Xingzhe, Sun Zhi", although it is an almost forced initiative, after all, it has the upper hand in terms of momentum. The positive party keenly discovered the one-sidedness of the other party's argument, and decisively started from the "Sun Wukong" side, questioning the other party based on "enlightenment" and "knowledge", making the other party's citations about "Sun Dasheng" become a firebrand passed down from generation to generation, burning itself.
For example, in the debate about "curing stupidity is more important than curing poverty", the affirmative stated this: "...the other debater wants to weigh the priorities, so I want to tell you, I'm very hungry now and I'm desperate to fill my stomach, but I still want to argue, because I realize that debating is more important than filling my stomach." As soon as he finished speaking, the audience burst into applause. At this time, the opposition debater calmly defended: "Opposition debater, I think 'not eating when there is food' and 'eating when there is no food' are two different things..." The opposition's answer aroused even warmer applause. . The positive side uses "no food to eat" to demonstrate the relative importance of poverty and the control of stupidity. The negative side immediately summarizes the purpose of "no food to eat" from its own perspective, clearly compares the nature of the two, and effectively stifles the The other party's tendency to change concepts secretly.
3. Water can carry a boat but also capsize it?
On the surface of the other party’s point of view, follow the logical derivation of the other party’s point of view, and set up some reasonable obstacles in the derivation according to our needs, so that the other party’s point of view cannot be established under additional conditions, or the conclusion of the other party’s point of view Completely opposite to the other party's point of view.
For example, in the argument of "Should we move mountains or houses?":?
Opponent: ..., we want to ask the other side's discerning friends, Foolish Old Man Moves Mountains to solve the problem Difficulties are eliminated, resources are protected, and manpower and financial resources are saved. What's wrong with this?
Fang: Yugong moving is not a good solution to the problem, but it is difficult to get out of the place where Yugong lives. How can the family move? ..., it can be seen that moving can be considered, but after moving, you still have to move mountains!
Mythological stories all use exaggerated techniques to express their truths. Their essence lies not in themselves but in their implications. Therefore, the positive side cannot allow the negative side to take detours on this matter. Otherwise, the negative side will conform to modern values. The "methodology" will prevail. Judging from the above argument, the negative side discusses the matter with sufficient reasoning and a solid foundation. The positive side first follows the trend and affirms that "moving is not a good way to solve the problem." This led to the question of "how to move a home?", and finally came to the conclusion of "move the mountain first, then move the house". Such a series of theories are intertwined.
It goes through every step and beats the opponent to pieces with an overwhelming offensive. It is wonderful!
Fifth, basic salary?
Tricky selective questions are one of the common offensive methods used by many debaters. Usually, this kind of question is premeditated, and it puts people into a "dilemma" situation. No matter which choice the other party makes, it is not good for them. A specific technique for dealing with this kind of questioning is to extract a preset option from the other party's selective questions for a powerful counter-examination, which fundamentally stands out. This technique is to draw out the bottom of the pot.
For example, in the debate topic "Ideology and morality must adapt to (beyond) the market economy", there was such a round of confrontation:?
Opponent:... I ask Is Lei Feng’s spirit the spirit of selfless dedication or the spirit of equal exchange?
Fang Fang: Another discerning friend here misunderstood equivalent exchange. Equivalent exchange means that all exchanges must be of equal value, but it does not mean that everything is exchanged. Lei Feng has not thought of exchange yet. Of course, Lei Feng’s spirit is not equivalent.
Opposer: Then I would also like to ask my fellow debater: Is the core of our ideology and morality the spirit of serving the people, or the spirit of profit-seeking?
Zhengfang: Isn’t serving the people a requirement of the market economy? (applause)?
In the first round, the opponent has the intention of "asking you to enter the urn" and comes prepared. Obviously, if you respond passively with fixed thinking, it will be difficult to deal with the "dilemma" preset by the other party: Choosing the former just proves the other party's view that "ideology and morality should transcend the market economy"; choosing the latter is supported by facts, but also has fallacies. existence. However, the affirmative debater jumped out of the "either/or" box set by the opponent's debater, and instead went straight to the point of "equivalent exchange" from the two preset options, completely overturning the tree shape to find out the root cause. Its accuracy as a preset option, its calm and unhurried tone, its sharp adaptability, and its flexible and skillful skills are breathtaking!
Of course, the actual situation in the debate field is very complicated. If you want to change from passive to active in the debate, mastering certain hosting skills is only one factor. On the other hand, the host also needs to rely on Very good on-the-spot performance, which has no rules to follow.