Lincoln-Douglas Debate

1. Lincoln-Douglas Debate A Question of Values

2. What is L-D debate? • A competitive type of formal debate practiced at high schools across the nation • Teaches you to argue logically and persuasively • Helps you learn to persuade others

3. Debate Propositions • Factual : either true or false • Policy : focuses on the desirability of a course of action • Value : involve philosophical judgments; no right or wrong answer • L-D debate is based on this type of proposition

4. Values and Value Analysis • Value : a standard we apply to judge something right or wrong, good or bad • Moral – just or unjust? Fair or unfair? • Aesthetic – beautiful or ugly? Artistic or inartistic? • Political – democratic or tyrannical? Helpful to freedom or harmful to it?

5. The responsibility of the L-D debater is to: 1. Find the values within a resolution 2. Apply those values 3. Prove or disprove the resolution How does one do this? By asking the ultimate question…

6. How ought things be? Ought refers to your idea of the ideal. - How you think things should be, regardless of how they actually are now. A difference between should and ought - Should suggests doing what is appropriate or fitting. - Ought refers to a moral obligation based on a sense of duty.

7. Establishing Valid Arguments • Facts and other forms of evidence are a crucial part of debate • Facts alone cannot establish the validity of a value statement • Must have facts combined with the right values

8. Values commonly used in L-D: • Liberty: People and governments ought to act so that each individual has the greatest possible freedom (without harming others • Equality of opportunity: Government policies should give all citizens fair access to jobs and services • Democracy: The people ought to have the maximum possible role in determining questions of right and wrong • Justice: Value that protects other values, such as liberty and fairness

9. Preparing For Battle:Writing Cases • Case: Your basic position on the resolution; made up of all the arguments that you choose to present • 4 Steps: • Introduction • Definitions and analysis of the resolution • Establishing values • Arguments

10. You should always tell the judge and your opponent when you are moving from section to section in your case. * signposting • Example: • First, we should examine key terms… • Now, I will present my value… • At this point, I will offer criteria… • Next, I will present the first argument…

11. The Introduction • State your position • Start with a compelling statement to support your position • Many debaters choose to begin speeches with a quotation. Should lead smoothly into the resolution, and should support your side.

12. Definitions and Analysisof the Resolution • Must define key terms in the resolution - Different people have different meanings for the terms; gives common ground for debate • Not too broad - Honesty is being faithful • Not too restrictive - Honesty is telling the truth when your mother asks where you were Saturday night

13. In order for the debate to be meaningful, there must be a conflict.

14. Establishing Values • Value Premise: establishes a standard by which one can evaluate whether or not the resolution is true; provides a starting point for an argument by summarizing the value you are using as the basis of the argument. • Judge uses it as a standard for deciding the debate • Whichever speaker better upholds the value premise should win the debate

15. Value criteria: provide further standards of judgment for evaluating whether or not the value premise has been realized. • Both the negative and affirmative sides may state value criteria.

16. Arguments: your reasons for favoring your side of the resolution 1. Always make sure your arguments refer back to your value premise. • Example: if you have presented the value of public safety, each of your arguments must mention public safety.

17. 2. Always relate your evidence to your value premise. • Evidence only supports your case if you relate it to your value premise • One type of evidence that is commonly used is quotations from famous philosophers. • Make certain that they actually apply to your arguments!

18. Debate Skills • Clash: making your arguments directly conflict with your opponent’s. • A desirable goal in L-D debate • Clash with your opponent’s arguments by refuting them—showing how they are flawed. • In refuting, you should address opponent’s arguments in the order they presented them.

19. Refutation Pattern: • Briefly state your opponent’s arguments • Say how many responses you have • Make those responses, numbering each one as you go Pattern will help keep your speeches organized and clear.

20. Common Refutation Techniques: • Counterexamples: Examples that go against those of your opponent Example: You are debating whether or not homeless people who beg are invading pedestrians’ privacy. Opponent points out that some beggars are alcoholics just trying to support their addiction. Your counterexample could be that some families are forced to beg in order to survive on the streets.

21. Analogies: Useful in refuting arguments that are not supported by evidence. Example: Resolved: that the United States ought to value global concerns above its own national concerns. Opponent’s points: 1. The United States has the capability of helping other nations; 2. All leaders capable of helping others should do so; 3. Therefore, the U.S. should value global concerns above national concerns Your analogy: Just because you are the best student in your biology class does not mean that you have to have a study session at your house every night to bring up the grades of other students.

22. Contradictions: Pointing out that your opponent presented a value that contradicted their arguments. Example: “Resolved: that communities in the United States ought to have the right to suppress pornography.” Affirmative is defending free speech. You should point out that suppressing pornography would make speech less free. This proves that the value the opponent is defending contradicts their argument. • Crystallization: Choosing the most important arguments and linking them back to the values presented in the round • Focus on the key issues; tell the judge why your value is superior to your opponent’s and why you are winning each of the key issues.

23. Structuring Your Speeches • First affirmative constructive (1AC): 6 min • Negative cross-examines affirmative: 3 min • First negative constructive (1NC): 7 min • Affirmative cross-examines negative: 3 min • First affirmative rebuttal (1AR): 4 min • Negative rebuttal (NR): 6 min • Second affirmative rebuttal (2AR): 3 min

24. The Constructives

25. First Affirmative Constructive: 6 min • Prepared entirely before the round begins • Give constructive, then wait to be cross-examined by negative side • Should have these basic elements: • Introduction: 30 sec • Definitions, value premise, value criteria: 1 min • Arguments: 4 min • Conclusion: 30 sec

26. First Negative Constructive: 7 min • Begin with a prepared constructive presentation lasting approximately 3-4 minutes • Should include an introduction, a value premise and value criteria, counterdefinitions, and arguments. • Devote the remainder of the speech to refuting the arguments presented in the affirmative constructive • Clash with the affirmative value and arguments

27. Cross-Examinations • Follows each constructive • The speaker who has just spoken is questioned • Tips: • Never let them see you sweat • Respond to each question thoughtfully and confidently • Know your case thoroughly and plan responses to anticipated questions • Stick to the question asked; don’t ramble on • Prepare carefully to avoid falling into traps

28. The Rebuttals The act of countering your opponent’s attacks on your arguments so you can rebuild those arguments.

29. General Principles: • The purpose is to bring the round into focus so that you are able to defeat your opponent’s arguments. • Do not initiate new arguments; rather, extend arguments already introduced in constructives. • Attempt to find a common fault in the arguments if you are running low on time. • Point out dropped arguments to the judges. • Highlight false assumptions and contradictions at the beginning. • Begin by refuting opponent’s analysis and then return to your own case. • Always crystallize: Clarify why the points you are winning are important; link crucial arguments back to your value.

30. First Affirmative Rebuttal: 4 min • Generally considered the most challenging speech in L-D debate. You have only 4 minutes to address 7 minutes of negative constructive. • Good approach: • Spend from 30-45 sec. on the value clash. Tell why your value is superior. • Use 1 ½ min refuting negative arguments. Mention each position stated by your opponent. • Use remaining time to reestablish the strength of your case.

31. Negative Rebuttal: 6 min • Last chance for negative side to speak. • Shut down arguments that you anticipate will be raised in second affirmative rebuttal. • Good approach: • Begin with value clash • Refute affirmative case • Return to defending your own case • Crystallize your arguments for the last 1 ½ to 2 min • Pick most important issues from your perspective, and state why you are winning them. Affirmative will be forced to address these issues—put them on the defensive.

32. Second Affirmative Rebuttal: 3 min • Focus on three or four issues of key importance. Don’t have to be concerned with covering all of the issues mentioned previously. • Emphasize value clash first, then examine negative crystallization from affirmative perspective.

33. Using Prep Time: 3 min per side • Affirmative: Allocate two minutes before 1AR and one minute before 2AR • Negative: Split evenly – half before 1NC and half before NR

34. November/December topic • Resolved: In the United States criminal justice system, truth-seeking ought to take precedence over attorney-client privilege. • - Start analyzing this topic –BRING TO CLASS • Define key words • Brainstorm aff/neg arguments • Start researching the topic.

35. The End! Now you should be informed about the Basics of Lincoln-Douglas debate