Generally speaking, it takes about a week to prepare an ordinary debate. Students who have just participated in the debate are easy to fall in
Generally speaking, it takes about a week to prepare an ordinary debate. Students who have just participated in the debate are easy to fall into blind preparation. Generally speaking, at this stage, two tasks must be completed, one is to form an argument, and the other is to establish a strategy to express the argument. The following is what I need to do before the debate. Welcome to reading.
Preparation before the debate 1, forming an argument
First of all, we must analyze and collect arguments before we can form an argument.
1 analytical debate
The main thing is to find out the meaning of the question and find out the differences. To distinguish the meaning of a question is to grasp the meaning of the debate, clarify the connotation and extension of the concepts in the debate, and understand the background of the debate, because the background of the debate is the context of the concepts it uses, which directly affects the connotation and extension of these concepts. For example, in the debate on whether trade protectionism can be suppressed, the emergence, development, change and suppression of trade protectionism have various historical and social backgrounds. Without understanding these backgrounds, it is impossible to accurately and comprehensively grasp the meaning of the concept of "trade protectionism", and it is also impossible to determine whether to hold a positive attitude or a negative attitude towards "can be suppressed". Therefore, understanding the background helps to better understand the meaning of the problem. Only by distinguishing the meaning can we analyze its knowledge points and controversial points and accurately find the differences.
2 Collect arguments
Analyze the debate, determine your views on the debate and form your own arguments. Of course, some arguments have been mastered when they are formed, but in order to better demonstrate their own arguments and deal with them freely and skillfully in the debate, it is necessary to collect sufficient arguments, which can be used as facts, theoretical materials or materials for metaphor and analogy.
The basic requirements for collecting arguments are necessary, true, typical and novel.
Novelty: A novel argument can be attractive, refreshing and can achieve amazing results. Therefore, if you choose a novel argument, you will definitely have the strength of argument.
Typical: Whether an argument can effectively demonstrate an argument depends on whether it is typical. The so-called typical argument is a representative argument that reflects the essence of things. This argument is very convincing.
Necessity: refers to the essential argument materials to demonstrate one's own argument or refute the other's argument. It is an argument related to one's own argument, that is, an argument that is bound to lead to one's own argument or an argument that is bound to overthrow the other's argument.
Truth: Truth is the life of an argument, and only a true and reliable argument can prove its correctness. Whether it is a factual argument or a theoretical argument, we must identify the authenticity and verify the authenticity; Metaphor or analogy arguments should also be reliable and have a close logical relationship with their own arguments.
2, determine the strategy
Mainly to arrange offensive and defensive strategies. The so-called "attack" is to determine the ways and means to prove one's own argument and refute the other's argument. The so-called "defense" is to determine the methods and tasks to resist the criticism of the other side.
To determine the offensive and defensive strategy, we must know ourselves and ourselves. On the one hand, we should fully estimate our own side: whether the argument is correct, whether the argument is substantial and reliable, whether the argument is rigorous enough, whether the methods of defense and attack are appropriate, whether the overall cooperation is close, whether the materials related to the debate are fully prepared, and whether they can improvise when using these materials. This is a "bosom friend". On the other hand, to fully understand each other, we should not only understand their arguments and strategies, but also understand their personal situation, such as psychological quality, knowledge literacy, hobbies, life experience, advantages and disadvantages, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of their overall cooperation. , that is, "know each other." Knowing ourselves and knowing ourselves, we can strengthen our own strengths and make people short. If you define your strategy in this way, you can expect to win every battle.
If it is a fierce debate competition, it is best to conduct a practical exercise after the strategy is established to simulate the upcoming on-site debate. During the exercise, check whether the determined strategies are feasible, whether there are loopholes, and whether they need to be modified or supplemented, so as to further improve these strategies. This kind of practice can also train debaters, improve their consciousness of participating in the debate and strengthen their ability to adapt to the situation. Therefore, pre-war drills are a good way to test and improve the preparatory work before the debate.
Expanding: Court Debate Skills
First, basic skills and operational skills
People's thinking can only influence others through expression. The quality of expression depends on the content of expression, but the skill of expression is also the key to success. A competent lawyer should not only have good writing organization ability, but also have accurate, concise, clear and vivid language expression ability.
Written expression skills
It is a basic work that every lawyer must do before the trial to synthesize the case, straighten out the debate ideas and write the agency and defense well. The organization of the material must be: 1. Choose words carefully and use words accurately; 2. Distribute reports and make a reasonable layout; 3. Discourse cohesion is interlocking; 4. Rigorous structure and clear organization; The key points are prominent and the details are appropriate.
Second language expression skills
From beginning to end, every successful lawyer has the ability to control and dominate the debate situation when arguing and representing in court. The reform of the trial system provides a broad space for every lawyer to play this ability. For the trial debate, the lawyer should be: 1. Take off the manuscript and be good at saying the preface. In this respect, when designing tone and choosing words, we must achieve the following effects: ① immediately seize the attention of the audience; (2) convey the seriousness of the case or show sincerity to the case; (3) Show confidence in the case. 2. Control the speed of speech and articulate clearly. With good debate content, you need good expression. Lawyers should speak clearly, pronounce accurately, have a harmonious tone and speak at a moderate speed when arguing in court. Strive to achieve intonation cadence in order to improve the infectious effect of the debate. 3. Be good at reasoning. Words can hurt or touch people. It's immoral for lawyers to hurt people with debating language. However, it is advisable for lawyers to use emotional language in debates. When using this kind of language emotion, we must pay attention to the following problems: ① The debate language of specific cases should be rich and colorful, with a tone suitable for the case. (2) Never with the emotional color of the parties. The emotion operated by lawyers is the debate emotion and legal language processed by rational language. Emotional words should be neutral language, expressive but not revealing, releasing but not vertical, euphemistic, tortuous and implicit.
Three image skills
Besides writing and language skills, lawyers should also have good body language skills. The integration of sound and silence, language and posture can better reflect the lawyer's exquisite expression ability.
1. Lawyers should be elegant and brave, and be neither supercilious nor supercilious in court debates. When the debate is in full swing, don't get carried away and despise each other; When you lose, don't panic, don't worry. You must weigh what you say, and you must not rashly say anything that is unprepared and unqualified. In any case, you should be generous, calm and orderly, and there should be evidence in your words. Lawyers should have this image of combining rigidity with softness, using static braking and winning steadily.
2. Be good at controlling emotions. As the old saying goes, "A soldier has no constant potential, but water is impermanent." This often happens in court debates. Lawyers may encounter unexpected or expected abnormal obstacles, interference, difficulties, etc. In the trial. This requires lawyers to control their emotions, not to be angry, not to show their emotions when they are surprised, and to take effective measures on the spot to calm down, stabilize and eliminate accidents, so as to be flexible and win in stability.
Second, the strategy and specific application
Avoidance of reality leads to virtual law.
In the trial debate, the weakness of the other party is often the place that the other party tries to avoid, and even the other party will try to divert his attention and disturb his audio-visual purpose by changing the topic, changing the concept and answering irrelevant questions. Therefore, to apply this method, we must first be good at grasping each other's "emptiness" and choose its weak links to attack repeatedly until the issue is clearly debated.
Indirect negation method
It means that you don't directly point the finger at the other party in the debate, but casually put aside your opponent's wrong views in the debate, seriously put forward your own unique views from the front and fully demonstrate them. There are two points to note when applying this method: 1. One side's view should be inconsistent with the other's. 2. Self-views should be well-founded and must not be far-fetched and grandstanding.
Three-indication false hidden truth method
This legal system refers to giving factual evidence irrelevant to this case, using language skills to cover up the truth or original intention, forming the illusion of the other party, and then making a sudden attack to take out the real and favorable evidence or opinions of the other party, resulting in the other party being in a passive and unprepared state in the trial. Nowadays, the trial mode of "giving evidence in court and cross-examining in court" undoubtedly provides a wide range of application space for this argument.
Fourth, retreat for progress.
It is the application of reduction to absurdity of formal logic in court debate. The ego first assumes that the proposition or viewpoint put forward by the other party is true, and then deduces one or a series of absurd conclusions from the proposition with this assumption as true, thus obtaining the argument method that the original topic is false. This method is a highly arguable and refutable court debate method, so the inevitable conclusion derived from it is easy to be accepted, thus achieving better debate effect.
Five-voice method
Under this legal system, one side of the court debate avoids talking about the questions that the other side may raise, while the questions that are extremely beneficial to itself are fully displayed in the debate speech first, so as to achieve preconceptions and strive for positive court defense tactics. In practice, the application of this method must be fully prepared before the trial, and the facts and evidence that are beneficial to one's own side should be identified one by one in the investigation stage of the trial. Then, according to the facts and evidence, take the initiative to refute the other party's incorrect views, so as to take the initiative in the debate, occupy the commanding heights and push the other party into a passive position.
Sixth, preemption.
War and war of words have many similar laws. Strategies and tactics in war can also be used as countermeasures for debate. Pre-emptive strike can produce advantages; Post-production can turn passive into active. Because of its backwardness, we can know each other's basic views, find contradictions and weaknesses, and then refute them with our own materials, which sometimes leads to the other side being caught off guard and full of danger. Master: 1 when using. Stay out of the spirit for a while, and don't fight in a hurry. 2. Listen carefully and wait for the opportunity. 3. Seize the flaw and fight back with all your strength.
7. Deny questioning method
Also known as the war of words smuggling law, the key to applying this law is that lawyers should hide the purpose of debate when asking questions, and never let the other side know the true intention of asking questions. Especially the first question, you must let the other person answer it before you know the intention of asking questions. As long as you answer the first question, you can't help but answer the next one. When the other person finds it difficult to justify himself, it is too late to regret it. This tactic of letting the other side be passive everywhere and hitting their own mouths is an extremely effective means of debate. The result can only be that the other party unconsciously accepts the views of lawyers or questioners and wins by surprise.
Third, the trial debate skills
1, simple and vivid
Court debate is a debate about facts, laws and theories, which often involves some complicated and difficult theoretical problems. At the same time, because the opponents in the debate are different, sometimes simple questions will become complicated. In this case, in a limited time, explaining a complex theoretical problem clearly in a simple way will often get obvious results.
2. Grasp the main direction and avoid deviating from the theme.
In the court debate, we should also pay attention to a very important issue, that is, we must grasp our own ideas and main attack direction, and don't let the other side lead by the nose, so as not to go astray and be unable to extricate themselves. Sometimes the other side will consciously avoid reality, change the subject, and then attack one point, not as good as the rest, so as to change the theme of the debate. At this time, you must be witty and don't be fooled.
3. The theoretical basis and working basis of winning the court debate.
Skill belongs to skill, after all, it is only one of the factors to win the court debate, not the basis to win the court debate. So, what is the basis for winning the court debate? First of all, you should have a solid theoretical foundation. Without a theoretical basis, you will make mistakes. No matter how clever it is, it's just grandstanding, just lip service. Secondly, we should have a solid working foundation, that is to say, we should fully investigate and collect evidence.
4. Adaptability in court debate
In court debates, we often encounter some unexpected situations. How to deal with this situation? This really tests the lawyer's ability to deal with emergencies. In court, some situations can't be prepared in advance, so the ability to adapt is very important for lawyers. In the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Kong Ming said Guo Jia: "Sit without talking, walk without standing." In other words, Guo Jia has no resilience. It can be seen that people who lack adaptability can only be psychological counselors, not lawyers.
Good psychological quality is an important factor to win the court debate.
There are many factors of psychological quality. As far as my personal experience is concerned, the most prominent thing is self-confidence. Self-confidence can keep you in a good mental state, let you give full play to your adaptability and be good at dealing with various environments and scenarios. Because the judicial environment in our country is not satisfactory, in some cases, the loser may not lose, and the winner may not win, especially in court, which may affect your mood. In this case, self-confidence will help you out of the predicament.
6, language expression should pay attention to the way.
In court debate, we should also pay attention to the expressive art of language itself, one of which is to make people understand and leave room for reaction and understanding. As we all know, language coherence is very important. Lawyers should not be tongue-tied, but should express a meaning clearly. But on the other hand, don't forget one more thing: leave room for understanding and pondering. Lawyers' eloquence needs to be fully demonstrated in court, but endless and rapid-fire speeches are not the only way to run through it, which I understand very deeply.
7. Debate should focus on the key points.
Grasping and highlighting the key points is not only important in court debate, but also important in court investigation and pre-trial preparation. Some complicated cases have a lot of content and are very confusing. At this time, we must grasp the key points, highlight the key points, not cover everything, and avoid diluting the theme. Some cases are very complicated, even involving dozens of criminal facts. Needless to say, some cases involve too much evidence and so on. If you can't grasp the key points within the limited trial time, you will often be led by the nose and get into trouble, which is not conducive to clarifying the key issues.
8, reasoning should also pay attention to strategy.
In court debate, we should pay equal attention to reasoning and strategy, and be good at choosing the most acceptable reasons and debate methods at critical moments. We may have a lot of truth in the debate, but how to express it? What kind of foothold will you choose to make the other party easy to accept? This is very important. Sometimes the court debate is fierce and wonderful, but the water and fire are incompatible and the two sides are deadlocked, and there are indeed their own reasons. In this case, it may not always be the best policy to stick to one's own words and continue the blind stalemate. On the other hand, if we can seize the opportunity to jump out of the circle, find a new idea that may break the deadlock as a starting point and launch a new offensive in a roundabout way, we are likely to succeed.
9. Be good at grasping and using contradictions
After the implementation of the new criminal procedure law, the content of the debate will inevitably be dissolved in court investigation and cross-examination. At this time, how to debate and how to make the debate more powerful is a problem worth studying and discussing. In court investigation, it is mainly to give evidence and cross-examine. There must be a basic idea of proof and cross-examination in advance. In court, we must seize the opportunity to look for clues and opportunities that are beneficial to us. On the one hand, we should be good at finding contradictions in each other's evidence, on the other hand, we should avoid contradictions. In some cases, it is not appropriate to expose one's thoughts prematurely in court investigation, so as not to be wary of the other party and make some important evidence impossible to verify. These skills are very important in court investigation, not only in the debate of criminal cases, but also in civil cases and other cases. All people involved in court debate have such problems.
Fourth, make the best use of the final debate.
Time for trial debate is very precious. When the mutual debate is coming to an end, lawyers, as one side of the debate, must have the ability to control the outcome. The usual practice is:
1. Ask questions. At the end of the question, we will further deepen the theme of our debate and let the judges identify and think.
2. Summarize the theme. It is easy for the judges to deepen their impression of their arguments by summarizing all the contents of their debates into a few sentences in a concise and clear tone.
Make a request. When the other party has been influenced by the debate in the whole process, it is easy for the other party to accept it and get the court's approval, thus promoting the case reconciliation between the two parties.
Of course, in the final stage of the court debate, if the other party is found to be entangled and refuses to accept the debt, lawyers, as defenders, should also master the skills of rejecting tasteless arguments. The so-called rejection of tasteless debate, one is not to repeat; Second, when the other party insists on some minor issues that do not hinder the handling of the case, it should adopt the way of "no debate on this issue" or "the speech is over here". This silence is not only a great shock at a certain time and in court, but also comes to an abrupt end in debating skills. It sounds like a step back, but in essence it is two steps forward.
The skill of trial debate is not only the art of door-to-door debate, but also one of the basic skills for lawyers to participate in litigation activities. People expect to hire a smart lawyer as their agent in litigation activities, and lawyers' debating skills should be an important manifestation of their intelligence.
People who have finished watching ""
1. How to prepare for the first debate?
2. Debate how to prepare before the preliminaries.
3. The necessary preparation before the novice debate.
4. Tips in the preparation process before the debate
5. How to prepare for the debate?
6. Skills of preparing materials for the debate.