Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

DAY 2:

Arguments are delivered in the structure of A.R.E.L, which stands for:
Assertion : state your claim. Your statement of why you support/oppose the motion.
Reasoning : logically explain why your claim is true. The because of your statement.
Evidence : give supporting data to strengthen your reasoning.
Link-back : the conclusion of your whole explanation, which is how your arguments prove the motion

Example 1:
The motion is about beauty pageants. You are the negative team. One of your arguments says that Miss
Universe kind of contests should be opposed because it degrades woman.
Arrange this randomized order speech into the correct order of A.R.E.L structure!
1) Assertion It puts a woman in a position as an object and to be valued based on their appearance.
Furthermore, the contest is aimed to be a commercial business, thus the contestants are
positioned to be a commodity. (2)
2) Reasoning Since it becomes an arena of women objectification as well as a business commodity, thus
the contest degrades women. (4)
3) Evidence/example Miss Universe contest degrades women. (1)

4) Link back The adjudication process are 80% based on beauty skill while the brain session is only
additional and the questions can be answered by elementary school students, like what will
you do if you are a president? While during the contest season, the event organizer open up
many gamble sites to bet on who is going to win and gain more than 2 billions US$ dollar in
2006 only. (3)

Example 2:
The motion is about quota for women in the parliament. You are the negative team. You want to say that
quota would only strengthen the paradigm in society that women have less capability than men, and
undermines them in the end.
Arrange this randomized order speech into the correct order of A.R.E.L structure!
1) Assertion Nowadays there is still a strong stigma in society believing that women are inferior to men
and has less capability than men. Reserved seats in the parliament will only strengthen the
paradigm that women can only sit in the parliament if they are facilitated but not because
they can equally compete with men. Thus justifying the wrong perception that women could
not reach the same level as men unless given privilege. (2)
2) Reasoning Quota will only strengthen the stigma in society that undermines women. (1)

3) Evidence/example Thus, quota for women in parliament will only strengthen the negative perception that
undermines women, hindering the promotion of women being equal to men. (4)
4) Link back In Uganda, public opinion that does not go in favor of women increased rapidly after the
implementation of this kind of quota (this was also supported by some polling). (3)

2) TYPES OF ARGUMENT (the deeper structure of reasoning)
Types of argument:
1. Justification Argument
2. Effectiveness Argument
3. Implication Argument
4. Hybrid Argument


(apakah kita benar melakukan hal ini, dll)
are arguments where we put certain assertions or goals to the test of principles in judgmental manner.
This requires knowledge on principles related to the motion as well as its origin for better understanding
and delivery.
a. Rights to live is a right which no one may limit
b. Individual rights to the extent of privacy may be breached for collective rights of security

Justification argument answers the question is it the right thing to do?. It basically answers the question of
right or wrong, whether something is appropriate or not, in the perspective which the debate uses as a
The instruments or sub-hypothesises used to prove this justification argument would be:
1)underlying principle, 2)argument object, and 3)link.

1. Underlying Principle:
an elaboration of principle used as a basis of judgement, (directed in such way so it tends to the
argument object, although the object is not discussed yet)
2. Argument object:
Characterizing the arguments object
3. Link:
Then to link the object of argument to the aforementioned principle

a. Argument: Rights to live is a right which no one may limit
Underlying Principle (filosofi, hak dan kewajiban, ideology, dll)
What are the basis for a state (the authority) to limit rights, what are the fundamental distinction
between derogable and non-derogable rights?
(apakah yang menjadi dasarnya, apa hak yang bisa diganggu gugat dan tidak bisa diganggu gugat
social contract, yg bisa diambil itu hak personal (konvrensi gay di hotel oval utk member keamanan,
orang merokok itu haknya diambil biar sehat, orang), hak basic ga bisa) masyarakat sudah
menyerahkan haknya ke pemerintah sehingga klo diambil y gpp
Argument object (baru ngmg intinya aja, kata2 kunci itu di argument objectnya)
Characterization of the rights to live
Why does the rights to live fall within the criteria of non-derogable rights?
(Similar examples to right limitation motions: mutant custody/superheroes de-power/free pokemon/taking
away transformers personal liberty/restrict make fun of religions on 9gag)

b. Argument: Pornography is consistent with feminism ideology

Underlying Principle
What is the basic principles held by feminism? (apa dasar dari feminism? Feminism itu menginginkan
Gerakan feminism ideology itu gerakan memperjuangkan kesetaraan gender
Argument object
Characterization of pornography
(contoh prostitusi sebelum membuat argument harus memikirkan sebab-akibatnya sehingga argumenya
kuat: mengapa jdi prostution worker karena ga memiliki keahlian, kenapa? Krna ga skolah, kenapa ga
sekolah, krna ga ada sekolah di daerah dasarnya akhirnya memakai tubuhnya utk bekerja))
(disamakan dg cowo, klo cowo ga punya skill/ keahlian dee bisa ae jadi kuli, dee bisa memakai ototnya utk
bekerja jadi kuli dsb. Klo cowo boleh, knapa cwe ga? Cwe kan bisa pake tubuhnya utk mencari uang. Klo kita
mendukung prostitusi, brart kita berarti memperjuangkan kesetaraan gender.)
That the characters of pornography is not contradictory to the principles of feminism, hence is
(Similar examples to a is consistent with b or not motions: aurors are allowed to use unforgiveable curse/jedi use
mind trick in the course of justice)

are arguments in which we claim one thing as the proper solution to the problem identified from the motion. It
is essential to characterize both the problem, and areas which the solution would affect. In the reasoning, we
need to explain what the problem requires to be solved, why our solution fulfills those requirements,
compare our claimed-solution to the system running in status quo and/or other alternative solutions currently
available (including the opponents, if any), and imply that our solution is the most appropriate.
a. Death penalty will help deter crime rate
b. Intercepting emails will provide better source to hunt terrorists (memata2i email menjadi cara yang efektif
untuk menangkap terorisme)

Problem Characterization
The nature and causes of the problem, or the thing which the solution wishes to change (directed in
such way so it tends to the solution offering, although it is not discussed yet) (, hal2 yang kita ingin
rubah dll) (diruntut ke belakang sebab-akibatnya sampai nemu masalah utamanya apa)
Solution Offering
in which areas will the solution work
The solution solves the problem

a. Argument: Death penalty will help deter crime rate
Problem characterization
What are the factors of a person committing crime, and how big a risk must be to deter them from
doing so?
(maling kenapa keluar-masuk penjara? Karena hukumannya terlalu ringan)
Solution offering
Death penalty deters future criminals, as it is an ultimate risk outweighing almost anything
(ketika seorang membunuh dihukum brp tahun, waktu keluar penjaradia akan melakukan hal yang
sama lagi ketika keluar dari penjara. Dg death penalty, kita memberikan resiko klo dia melakukan
kejahatan itu lgi. Ketika dia yang memiliki hak yang paling berharga (hidupnya) truz diambil, itu yang
bisa bikin dia jera.)
Death penalty would help deter crime
(Similar examples to death penalty, effective or not motions: Naruto should let Sasuke to be given death
penalty/Death eaters should be killed (given death penalty) in the spot by aurors using unforgiveable curse (and
ignores the process of law enforcement in the court of justice of the Ministry of Magic)
b. Argument: Lifting fuel subsidies will not deter people from consuming fuel
Problem identification
Consumption of fuel is an inelastic necessity. Inelastic necessity is not affected by price, but by
alternative supply of necessity. (Example: rice is an inelastic necessity, demand will be the same
irrespective of price. But using yams or potatoes may act as a replacement to the demand of rice)
Solution offering
the operation of a subsidy is to reduce price, so lifting it will increase price.
Increasing price will not affect demand towards inelastic necessities thus people will not be detered
from consuming fuel

are action-reaction arguments. It analyses the consequences of the action proposed, be it benefit or harm.
Requires creativity in actors or stakeholders identification and how they are related, which are the people
involved around the issue. Who does what, what the impacts are, who gets the impact (be it positive or
The elements to prove it would be:
claimed implication, characterization of implicaton, and characterization of acclaimed cause.
(klo misal ini dilakukan maka akan menghasilkan harm. Truz kta tanya, koq bisa? Dll)
Claimed implication (hasilnya bagus ato jelek)
what is the predicted effect, why is it bad/good
Characterization of implication (kenapa jelek, kenapa baik? Kok bisa?)
what are the natures and causes of the aforementioned implication
Characterization of acclaimed cause (kenapa koq bisa terjadi spt itu)
what is the nature of the subject of the argument (directed in such way that it seems to fulfil the causes
of the aforementioned implication)
why would the subject of the arguent cause the aforementioned implication

a. Women Quota will degrade women
b. Not covering illegal immigrants with free health insurance risks the spreading of foreign disease

Other example:
Argument: free trade will kill local industries in Indonesia
Claimed implication
local industries falling will mean job losses to so many people, and depriving in to poverty
(dikasih dampak buruknya)
Characterization of Claimed Implication
industries may fall when they can not compete in the market, therefore does not have enough
income to sustain its operation
(kenapa bisa jatuh? Karena dia ga bisa berkompetisi di pasar shg mereka tidak memiliki income yang
cukup untuk melanjutkan industrinya)
Characterization of Acclaimed Cause
Free Trade brings in foreign industries in to the local market competition, which the locals can not
compete against.
(kenapa bisa? Karena klo membawa free trade ke pasar local, maka industry asing akan masuk ke
pasar local dan industry local ga bisa bersaing dg industry asing. Karena ga bisa bersaing, industry
local akhirnya akan mengalamin kebangkrutan)

Free Trade will create competitions which the locals cant compete against, therefore will fall
(Similar examples to implication motions: Doraemon harms Nobita, Cosplay in the workplace, the matrix, x-
men, superheroes, harry potter, transformer, 9gag, superheores ignores emergency calls, etc)

5.Hybrid Arguments, (argument campuran, dalam argument dicampur2)

as the term implies, are hybrids of the previous types of arguments two, or maybe even three of them.
Therefore, one argument doesnt always fall under only one criterion as mentioned above. Thus an argument
could have two or even three ways of analysis.
a. US method on terrorism hunt violates human rights (principle), thus it decreases international respect
and cooperation (implication) while international cooperation is necessary to hunt terrorists who are
multinational (effectiveness).
b. Subsidy helps alleviate poverty (effectiveness) which is government responsibility (justification).

Похожие интересы