Asian Parliamentary Debate

BUKIDNON DEBATE UNION
ASIAN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE

DEBATE is a particular form of argument. It is a way of arbitrating

between differences, not reconciling them. The purpose of a debate is
not for two disputing parties to leave the room in agreement. Instead,
through the debate between them, others will form a judgment about
which of the two to support.
Debate recognizes that people are capable of disagreeing on
everything about which it is possible to hold an opinion. It relishes
those conflicts and provides a means by which to agree on common
action. While the contrasts are often extreme and the language
forceful, the process is consensual and peaceful.
Generally . . .
 Debating is a clash of argumentations between Government and
Opposition teams
 Everything starts from the word “motion”
 Competitive debating aims to simulate a living, breathing
parliamentary debate
 The soul of debating is to argue on policies, or propositions of
thought
Debating is about . . .
 Listening to your teammates and opponents.
Thinking outside of your comfort zone.
Being firm with your side.
Being consistent, even if you think you are wrong.
Teamwork.
Types of Debate
VALUE JUDGEMENT POLICY
DEBATE DEBATE
Principle issues (Moral, Ethnics, Implementation of models,
Economics, Effectiveness of exactly how to solve a problem
outcomes) Whose model is better?
Should or should not solve the Who provide more benefit to the
problem in a certain way majority
Ex. TH regrets the human fixation Ex. THW legalize the use medical
on happiness marijuana
GENERAL RULES
1. There are two houses: Government and Opposition.

2. Topic is given on the venue of the debate before the
round starts.
3. Teams are given 30 minutes to prepare.
4. During preparation time, coaches are not allowed to discuss
with their debaters.
5. What do you do if you don’t understand the motion?
Ask a member of the adjudication core.
6. During preparation time, usage of cell phones are limited to
dictionary only.
7. Printed materials are allowed during preparation time,

not during speech.
8. Each speaker is given time to speak in front.
9. Adjudicators are assigned in each room to adjudicate the
debate round.
10. Proper decorum is observe during the round.
The Format
G Prime Minister
Leader of the O
O Opposition P
V P
Deputy Prime Deputy Leader of
E O
Minister the Opposition
R S
N Government I
M Opposition Whip T
Whip
E I
N O
T Government N
Opposition Reply
Reply
The Format
A 3-on-3 debate
Consist of 4 speeches in each house
7 minutes substantive speech
4 minutes reply speech
30 minute case building time (preparation time)
Overview
GOVERNMENT OPPOSITION
 Support the motion & give a  Go against the motion
definition  Realize the problem, but go
 Realize the problem and against GOV’s proposal
propose a solution/change  State the bigger problem that
 Provide model or mechanism the proposition failed to
(the detailed implementation analyze.
process)  Provide counter-model or
 Engage with Opposition alternative or stick with status
quo
 Engage with Government
The Room Set-up

GOVERNMENT OPPOSITION
PODIUM
WHIP WHIP
DEPUTY PRIME DEPUTY LEADER

REPLY MINISTER OF OPPOSITION REPLY
SPEECH SPEECH
LEADER OF
PRIME MINISTER OPPOSITION
ADJUDICATORS
The Timing
Substantives
UNPROTECTED TIME: POIs ALLOWED
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7.20
PROTECTED TIME: NO POIs ALLOWED
Reply Speeches
1 2 3 4 4.20
THE MOTION
Motion
- the topic of the debate, what the government
house would be defending.
 A motion can be phrased and interpreted

differently
Motion Categories
 Closed Motion
THBT there is no such thing as universal human rights
THBT mandatory drug testing of public officials is justified
THBT child labor can never be justified
 Semi (Opened / Closed) Motion
This House supports privatization
This House would adopt a green agenda
This House believes that art is a diversion
 Open Motion
THBT we have no reverse
THW gain a burst of knowledge
THB in the more the merrier
Motion Abbreviations
 THW = This House Would
Example: THW ban smoking.
 THS = This House Supports
Example: THS LGBT(Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender)
 THC = This House Celebrates
Example: THC Single sex education system
 THR = This House Regrets
Example: THR ASEAN integration
 THBT = This House Believes That
Example: THBT all nations should possess nuclear weapons.
Analyzing Motion Burdens

 THW - This House Would = requires a policy.
 THBT - This House Believes That = assesses the truthfulness of a statement
 THBT X Should - This House Believes that X Should = doesn’t mean you take the
perspective of the actor concerned. Usually a neutral observer. Doesn’t necessarily
mean the best interest of the actor X.
 TH as X Would - This House as X Would = assumes the position of the actor X and its
best interest is the focus of the debate.
 THR - This House Regrets = evaluative and usually retrospective.
Note: Just because you are opposition in a “regrets” motion doesn’t mean you have to
celebrate it.
 THP X over Y - This House Prefers X over Y = assumes a trade-off.
KEYWORDS
Definition
 Is a need to clarify what the debate is specifically about, per keyword of
motion if necessary
 Scopes down a motion; to achieve a mutual agreement among both
teams on the interpretation of the motion thus the entry point for a
debate -> “room of debate”
 A Government team holds the right to determine and offer the
definition of a debate, while the opposition can accept, broaden or
challenge the provided definition
Must-Do in Definitions
1. Provide Time/Place Sets

⍟ Put the debate specifically in a time or
location.
Example: ‘We would debate this motion in
the context of WWI 1914’ or ‘We would place
this debate in Dominican Republic (an island in
the Caribbean)’
2. Determine Soft and Hard Line Case

 The terms ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ in reference to a definition or
model, are indications of how profound the changes that
is being proposed.
 A very small modification to the status quo is soft, while a

big change is hard. The status quo might be in terms of legal
principle or in terms of people’s attitudes.
2. Determine Soft and Hard Line Case

Example: For the topic “That this house supports euthanasia (mercy killing)” below
are different definitions you might choose.
SOFT MODERATE HARD
Team Split
 Division of argument in a team
 It helps to make a team organized
 It makes sure that the argument is
correctly sustained
Rebuttal
 Responses on your opponent’s arguments
 It’s not as simple as “accusing” things
 Simply saying your opposition’s arguments are
inferior does not constitute a good rebuttal
 Rebuttals must logically explain and analyze the
weaknesses of an argument.
Argument
 Points of view that supports the team stance (support/refute)
 Logical and thoroughly explained
 Arguments should be consistent within the team’s main stance
(theme/team line).
 Reasoning / logical explanations
 Principles plus factual data
NOTE: Rebuttals are not argumentations.
Argument Anatomy
IDEA
ANALYSIS/
PREMISES
EVIDENCE ARGUMENT
META-
ANALYSIS
EVIDENCE
SPEAKER ROLES &

STRUCTURES
The Prime Minister

Role of Prime Minister

⎆Defining the motion of the debate.
⎆Presenting the affirmative’s theme line.
⎆Outlining the affirmative’s team split.
⎆Delivering substantial arguments.
⎆Providing a brief summary/recap of the speech
Structure of Speech
⎆Introduction – Perspective, Principles
⎆Problems – to resolve
⎆Clarity – case, policy, definitions, time and place,
frame, filters
⎆Imperative
⎆Arguments
Prime Minister Definition

⎆ Provide Sufficient Background
⎆ Define Contentious Terminology
⎆ Identify The Problem – (Why is it a problem?)
⎆ Provide Policy - (Find a Solution)
⎆ Explain Who dose What and When,
⎆ How does it solve the problem
⎆ Why is this a better situation than before
⎆ Who is going to be affected by this and how is that better?
⎆ Easiest Solution is to Provide an Existing Model
E.g.: THW use children in the front line during war times
Prime Minister Policy Setting

In light of these frightening statistics on the harms of BREAD, it has been
proposed that the following bread restrictions be made:
1. No sale of bread to minors.
2. A nationwide "Just Say No To Toast" campaign, complete celebrity TV spots
and bumper stickers.
3. A 300 percent federal tax on all bread to pay for all the societal ills we might
associate with bread.
4. No animal or human images, nor any primary colors (which may appeal to
children) may be used to promote bread usage.
5. The establishment of "Bread-free" zones around schools.
The Leader of Opposition

Role of Leader of Opposition

⎆ Responding the definition given by the affirmative team
(accept/challenge).
⎆Rebutting the 1st affirmative speaker.
⎆Presenting the negative’s theme line.
⎆Outlining the negative’s team split.
⎆Delivering the substantial argument.
⎆Providing a brief summary/recap of the speech.
Structure of Speech
⎆Introduction – Perspective, Principles
⎆Rebuttals
⎆Problems – to resolve
⎆Counter Clarity – case, policy, definitions, time and place,
frame, filters
⎆Imperative
⎆Arguments
Structure of Speech
⎆Rebuttal:
a. Time line: Now → Action → Then
- Won’t work / Impractical / can’t be done
- Won’t solve the problem
- Outcome / Side-Effects worse than Solution.
E.g.: Co-operations Control The Future
b. Big Blue Ball
E.g.: Child labor can never be justified
E.g.: Abolish Capital Punishment
Structure of Speech
⎆Definition Debate:
a. Challenge the Definition (Prop it)
b. 2 debates running in tandem
c. The Right Definition wins the debate
(Not Necessarily the best arguments)
The Deputy Prime Minister

Role of Deputy Prime Minister

⎆ Develop the Case
⎆ Refutes the arguments presented by the Leader of
Opposition.
⎆ Rebuilds the case presented by the Prime Minister.
⎆ Adds new arguments to the case of the Prime Minister.

⎆ You must further develop your team’s argument.
Rebut what the first opposition speaker has said but
don’t spend all your time rebutting.
⎆ You must back up your Prime Minister. If he/she has
been torn apart then don’t jump ship. CLARIFY what
your house wants to achieve.

⎆ Don’t abandon your case just because you realize that it’s
flawed. Fix it instead of getting a new one. Adjudicators will
notice that and will penalize your team for inconsistency,
paradigm shifting, stabbing yourself to death, and the likes.
You will gain more marks for standing up for your team until the
end rather than jumping ship and engaging the opposition on their
ground, leaving your teammate behind.
Structure of Speech
⎆ Operationalize Society (CONTEXT) –
a. How do society operationalize?
b. What type of society do we want to achieve?
⎆ Fundamentals - Fundamentally right, Fundamentally fair
for everyone, Fundamentally flawed
⎆ Basic Questions
Structure of Speech
⎆ Acknowledge PM “This is why PM is very important”
⎆ Rebuttals
a) Analyze the relationship of characters
b) What’s the big question opposition failed to answer
c) Let me answer this question for them
d) This is a pragmatic narrative coming from them
e) This ____________won’t solve the issue of
f) Overstatement / understatement
g) Sweeping assumption - “not generally true statement”
The Deputy Leader of Opposition

Role of Deputy Leader of Opposition

⎆ Develop the Case
⎆ Refutes the arguments presented by the Leader of
Opposition.
⎆ Rebuilds the case presented by the Prime Minister.
⎆ Adds new arguments to the case of the Prime Minister.
Role of Deputy Leader of Opposition

⎆ Similar with the DPM, rebut the prior speaker from the
opposite bench and back up your first speaker.
Remember to communicate with your team and your
case should be set up in such a way that it in itself rebuts
the case of the government.
⎆Using this tactic should help you avoid the trap that a lot
of OPPOSITION SPEAKERS fall into; BY DOING A POINT-
TO-POINT REBUTTAL. (THIS IS A NO-NO.)
Structure of Speech
⎆ Operationalize Society (CONTEXT) –
a. How do society operationalize?
b. What type of society do we want to achieve?
⎆ Fundamentals - Fundamentally right, Fundamentally fair
for everyone, Fundamentally flawed
⎆ Basic Questions
Structure of Speech
⎆ Acknowledge LO “This is why LO is very important”
⎆ Rebuttals
a) Analyze the relationship of characters
b) What’s the big question opposition failed to answer
c) Let me answer this question for them
d) This is a pragmatic narrative coming from them
e) This ____________won’t solve the issue of
f) Overstatement / understatement
g) Sweeping assumption - “not generally true statement”
The Whip
Role of the Whip

⎆ Show Your side (Team) won the debate:
- Speaker by Speaker
- 3 Main Themes or ISSUES
- Time line: Now → Action → Then
⎆Summarize the entire debate from the point of view of your house.
⎆Defend the general viewpoint of both house with a special eye toward the
case of your house.
⎆Usually does not provide new arguments
Role of the Whip

⎆ New Information:
a. Answer a rebuttal or P.O.I.

b. Give a new analogy / example (to an existing
issue / argument)
Role of the Whip

⎆ Determine the Issues:
WHAT ARE ISSUES?
a. Basically the clash in the debate
b. A critical comparison and contrast between the cases of government
and opposition
c. Can be in a form of question – Where do we better cater women?
d. Can be in a form of a one liner – On the issue of sovereignty
e. Can be comparing/contrasting - On the issue of sovereign rights
versus international interference
The Reply Speaker

Role of the Reply Speaker

⎆ Given by 1st or 2nd speaker, NOT the WHIP
⎆ Summarizes the entire debate, looking at the arguments, role
fulfillment, main questions which need to be answered to win,
higher moral benefit majority, etc.
⎆ The team’s last opportunity to persuade their main points to the
adjudicator and focus on the key issues of the debate
⎆ Summarizes the team’s case shortly
⎆ No new Matter/ New Arguments, examples analysis
RHETORIC: The Element of

Persuasion in Speech
Elements of Speech
⎆POWER – there is power in speech, speeches/ Good
speeches provide an avenue of empowerment.
⎆MOVEMENT- This is Identified through many layers,
movement through thought, action or emotion
⎆CONNECTION – A speech is only good if it connects
with an audience
Goals of a Speech
⎆TO INFORM – A Good Speech is a well articulated
opinion, you want people to know of what you are
thinking.
⎆TO PERSUADE – A Good Speech has the ability to
challenge/reinforce/restate ideas towards the listener.
⎆TO CREATE EXPERIENCE – A Good Speech is a
remembered speech, one that delights and makes a
crowd think, it provides a venue of Experience
Rhetoric: An Art of Speech

⎆PLATO: “an art of winning the soul through
discourse”
⎆Francis Bacon: “The duty and office of rhetoric
is to apply reason to imagination for the better
moving of the will”
⎆Andrea Lunsford: "Rhetoric is the art, practice,
and study of human communication.“
Goal of Rhetoric – In Debate

⎆Four ENDS OF DISCOURSE:
1. Enlighten the understanding – through good opinion
2. Please the imagination – invite a vivid verbal experience
3. Move the Passion – invoke an interaction
4. Influence – Change Hearts and Minds
THE SPEECH – Designing Rhetoric

⎆THE ACT in Speech – a speech is in many forms an organized theater
or words.
⎆THE SPEECH IS AN ACT – an orchestra of words. Depiction of scenes
through intelligible opinion.
⎆THE SPEAKER IS AN ACT – The Presenter, the actor, the one who
becomes
⎆THE DEBATE IS AN ACT – the Highest Form of Participative Theater,
the course is sewn through responses and engagements.
How to Add Rhetoric

⎆The SPEECH - structure, rule of the third,
and painting a picture
⎆THE SPEAKER – Tone, Gestures,
Confidence, Clarity, Re-invention and Stage
Position
Suggesting a Tone
⎆Rule of Third – debate speeches should avoid using a personal tone,
the approach should be in Third Person, EX. “My uncle was a war
veteran, you should believe me.”
⎆Structure – Speeches should be fluid, start with a good statement, a
question a nice greeting or anything that creates a good impression.
⎆Painting a Picture – Your Choice of words should be descriptive, act
as if you are painting a picture, or describing a scene Ex. The people
are poor (Can you instantly imagine this?)
For the Speaker

⎆ Gestures – make good gestures, epitomize your speech, become the
theme of your speech. Avoid annoying Gestures and weird
mannerisms Ex. “playing with your hair while speaking”
⎆ Re-Invention – Always find ways to improve your style, integrate,
adjust and never settle for less. “Look at other debaters for
inspiration( GOOD ONES “
⎆ Stage Position – Angle Yourself, be aware of your projection on
stage/podium, reflect confidence and focus on the
adjudicator/audience.
Pleasing the Senses

⎆ Audibility – clarity, don’t speak too loud or too soft, find a
mid-range. Avoid eating your words, to persuade is to delight
the ears.
⎆ Sight – Dress Decently or Called for the occasion, avoid
distraction and Look Good
⎆ Thought – Invite a mindful discourse for the audience,
challenge their thoughts.
The speech is like a play. . .

⎆ Great Speeches are those that can be appreciated by
a wider audience.
⎆Never rely on just the element of content, the delivery
is also equally important, SPEAK TO PERSUADE
⎆GIVE IN YOUR HEART. Even for just the duration of
the debate. BECOME the SPEAKER.
ADJUDICATION
Who is an Adjudicator?
⎆ is an Ordinary Intelligent Voter (sometimes
also termed ‘average reasonable person’ or
‘informed global citizen’)
⎆ This hypothetical ordinary intelligent voter doesn’t have
pre-formed views on the topic of the debate and isn’t
convinced by sophistry, deception or logical fallacies.
⎆ They are open-minded and concerned to decide how to
vote – they are thus willing to be convinced by the debaters
who provide the most compelling case for or against a certain
policy.
⎆ They are well informed about political and social affairs
but lack specialist knowledge. They are intelligent to the point
of being able to understand and assess contrasting arguments
(including sophisticated arguments) but they keep
themselves constrained to the material presented unless it
patently contradicts common knowledge or is otherwise
wildly implausible.
The term ordinary intelligent voter will be used as a

shorthand to describe the expectation that judges should:
 Avoid utilizing personal knowledge that they have of the topic, unless it could reasonably be assumed to
be held by someone of decent intellect and active news-media consumption (e.g.: “Syria is in the Middle
East” or “Russia is a major oil producer” is clearly acceptable knowledge, but the details of Iraqi
government troop movements is unlikely to be);
 Give little credit to appeals merely to emotion or authority, except where these have rational influence
on an argument;
 Avoid presuming a geographic, cultural, national, ethnic or other background when assessing
arguments;
 Avoid referencing arguments or styles of speaking that match personal preferences;
 Assess the merits of a proposed policy, solution or problem separate from any personal perspectives in
relation to it.
Assessment of Clashes
⎆ Adjudicators listen to material presented in
the debate, and the debate alone
⎆ Ignores personal opinion towards an issue,
and judges the debate objectively
Weighing Debates
1. What is the most important clash in the debate? Who
presented it and how well?
2. What are the burdens of proof?
3. Which side responded better to the developments through
the debate?
Debate Scoring
82-83: Perfect. Speech was absolutely flawless, brilliant and belief-
shattering.
80-81: Excellent. Completely brilliant and eye opening. Showcased not
only an understanding of the issues but also compelling insights into
them. No complaints in terms of role fulfilment or substantiation.
77-79: Above average. Arguments were complete, clear and answered
questions in the debate. Role positions were fulfilled well, including
accepting at least one POI. Material was precise and true to the core of
the debate. Meta-argument was also present
Debate Scoring
74-76: Average. Material was equal parts good and flawed. The speech
was largely only adequate in fulfilling role burdens and technical rules.
72-73: Below average. Ideas were underdeveloped, substantive matter
was lacking, little to no responsiveness or dynamism. Minor technical
violations were committed.
69-71: Speech was incoherent and deeply flawed. Major technical
violations were committed.
67-68: No contributions, speech (or lack thereof) hurt the team case
HAPPY DEBATING

Asian Parliamentary Debate

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Asian Parliamentary Debate

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

BUKIDNON DEBATE UNION

ASIAN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE

DEBATE is a particular form of argument. It is a way of arbitrating

1. There are two houses: Government and Opposition.

7. Printed materials are allowed during preparation time,

The Room Set-up

DEPUTY PRIME DEPUTY LEADER

PROTECTED TIME: NO POIs ALLOWED

 A motion can be phrased and interpreted

Analyzing Motion Burdens

1. Provide Time/Place Sets

2. Determine Soft and Hard Line Case

 A very small modification to the status quo is soft, while a

2. Determine Soft and Hard Line Case

SPEAKER ROLES &

The Prime Minister

Role of Prime Minister

Prime Minister Definition

Prime Minister Policy Setting

The Leader of Opposition

Role of Leader of Opposition

The Deputy Prime Minister

Role of Deputy Prime Minister

Role of Deputy Prime Minister

Role of Deputy Prime Minister

The Deputy Leader of Opposition

Role of Deputy Leader of Opposition

Role of Deputy Leader of Opposition

Role of the Whip

Role of the Whip

a. Answer a rebuttal or P.O.I.

Role of the Whip

The Reply Speaker

Role of the Reply Speaker

RHETORIC: The Element of

Rhetoric: An Art of Speech

Goal of Rhetoric – In Debate

THE SPEECH – Designing Rhetoric

How to Add Rhetoric

For the Speaker

Pleasing the Senses

The speech is like a play. . .

The term ordinary intelligent voter will be used as a

Вам также может понравиться