How to Win a Formal Debate or Academic Dispute
Logical Fallacies, General Debate Strategy and Tactics for Victory
Apr 15, 2009
The formal debate is typically structured in three general phases, the opening statements or arguments, the questions and debate topic proper and corresponding rebuttals, as well as the closing statements and arguments. While no two debates will ever be the same, it is important to know some general strategy in order to ensure you defend your side with intelligence, wit, and flair – and hopefully gain victory over your opponents.
General Tips and Procedures
During a formal debate, it is of the utmost importance to have prepared a very logical and compelling opening and closing statement – these are the times that you will have the best opportunity to explain your position without too much badgering or cross-examination and thus you should squeeze as much mileage as you verbally can out of these periods.
A good opening statement encapsulates your thesis within the first thirty seconds and then lays out a variety of factual and logical groundwork, the "roots" of your firmest argument, entrenching your position against the inevitable rebuttal to come.
A good closing statement not only seeks to initially weaken the argument of your opponent via your strongest criticism of their performance – but ends with a slightly modified reiteration of your primary points, listed in order and with supporting evidence for each. If you are a strong in logic, you may also use the initial period of your closing statements to deconstruct your opponents lynchpin argument - though this is a risky strategy for amateurs in that one can very easily fall prey to the "non sequitur" or false cause fallacy, latin for "it does not follow."
A consummate debater will almost invariably lend credence to the maxim that the best defense is a strong offense. Deconstruction of your opponents argument, the figurative foundation that all of their further conjecture and logic must rest daintily upon is the key to profound and obvious success. If one can successfully defend their own argument with adequate skill while dismantling the arguments of your opponent – forcing them to use their speaking time to weakly and inefficiently, and often, illogically defend their supporting theses, victory is nearly a sure thing.
Debate is a vicious and adversarial sport by definition, and while conducted professionally and with gravity; it is a combative and confrontational beast by nature and fortune most definitely favours the bold.
Pitfalls – Logical Fallacy and the Dreaded Ad Hominem
In formal and academic debates, there are a few penalties that generally score against your arguments, known as logical fallacies. These fallacies are descriptors of logical weakness, common logical faults or flaws that are adopted by many people, both great and small, over the kitchen table as well as in the heat of debate.
The most common fallacies are the straw man argument, the slippery slope argument, argumentum non sequitur, and finally the argumentum ad hominem. Briefly explained, the straw man argument refers to the method of switching an opponents argument with a tangentially similar though thoroughly weaker one.
The slippery slope argument is very common, and occurs when conjecture is raised positing a series of increasingly serious outcomes stemming from one initial result. A modern example of the slippery slope fallacy would be the argument against same-sex marriage : "If we allow gays and lesbians to marry, then polygamy and even bestiality will become socially acceptable." Neither of these allegations is logically accurate in the least.
Of these penalties, the ad hominem is surely the most grievous against your case – an ad hominem argument takes place when one attacks the representative of the argument rather than the argument itself. For example, mocking an overweight opponent with regards to his stature while debating the merits and detriments of social democracy would constitute a flagrant ad hominem attack, and would not only disqualify you completely but cast shame upon your argument and position entirely.
Avoiding foolish logical mistakes can sometimes take some practice, especially if one is personally invested in the cause or belief in the debate they are participating in – personal passion is a wonderful thing and can prove to be a great boon, or conversely, a disaster.
By preparing for a debate and ensuring that one remains calm and maintains a cool, intelligent presence will go a great distance in not only winning the minds of the judges, but also the hearts and persuasion of the audience. After all, debate is not always simply an academic and cerebral exercise but also an examination of the human condition and the myriad issues and questions that accompany our existence.
Other Articles Pertaining to Debate, Discussion, and Social Issues
 |
