Analysis of debate form-15 type

It is certainly important to clearly judge the type of debate. Today, I will focus on the debate of type 15:

1

If you say yes, I will sayno. The rising divorce rate is a sign of social civilization.

2. Comparative debate

Compare the debate between the two, for example: career is more important than love.

3. Debate between pros and cons

Analyze the pros and cons of the debate, such as: computers bring good news to mankind.

4. Can you refute it?

That is, if this can be done, then it cannot be demonstrated. For example, Confucianism can resist unhealthy trends in the West.

5. Possible arguments

That is, the debate between possibility and impossibility, such as: ecological crisis may lead to the extinction of mankind.

6, the premise of the debate

That is, who is who, for example, economic development should be based on educational development.

7. You should debate this topic.

In other words, we should argue like this, not like that. For example, Yu Gong should move.

8. Debate successively.

That is, to judge who comes first, for example, morality comes first.

9, light and heavy debate

A debate on judging which is more important, such as: human society should value righteousness over profit.

10, opposing debate

That is, a sharp opposition between the two sides and a debate that is incompatible with water and fire. If you don't break, you will stand.

1 1. The debate at the end of this article

That is, who is the foundation and who is the purpose, such as: human nature is good.

12, the debate between primary and secondary

That is, to judge who is in charge and who is in charge, for example, students focus on learning knowledge.

13, the inevitable argument

That is, the argument that one must do this but not that, such as: efficiency must sacrifice equality.

14, necessary debate

That is, the debate between necessary topics and unnecessary topics, such as: food and clothing is a necessary condition for talking about morality.

15, big and small debate

That is, who is older and who is younger, for example, righteousness is greater than benefit.

To sum up, it is:

A: size

Right and wrong

C: continuously

D: primary and secondary schools

E: weight

Five kinds of debates

It boils down to:

1, compare

2. inevitability

3. Others

Three categories

Training method of debate team

Training is very important for debate, so we must grasp this link well.

In fact, the form of training is not uniform because of different teams, so we should choose the way that suits us.

Here are some ways to help beginners.

In addition, I hope everyone will add! ! !

1, collective listening

Step 2 discuss collectively

3. A speaker

Step 4 practice alone

5. Learn from each other.

6. Two people fight.

7. Two people quarrel with each other.

8. Team boxing

9. Arrange homework

10, answer the question.

1 1, find fault with each other

12, special sparring

13, compound sparring

14, reflect and understand alone

15, watch the video

16, scene training

17, conjunction

18, impromptu joke

19, impromptu humor

20. Retell the story

2 1, a word evaluation

22, a word to describe

23. Describe the scenery

24. Repeated confrontation

25, staggered combination

26, positive and negative drills

27, layers of chasing

28, rapid strain

29. Come back from the dead

30, actual combat exercises

The pre-competition part of the taboo in the competition

1, never underestimate your enemy.

This will lead to failure due to paralysis and laxity.

2. Avoid fear of the enemy.

You will lose confidence, courage and fighting spirit, and lose.

3. Avoid heavy burdens.

Many concerns will affect the performance on the court and the adjustment of emotions. You should go into battle light and relax.

4, avoid all night.

Will make the spirit not concentrate, lead to dizziness, slow response, incoherent.

5, avoid celebrating too early.

It is also a sign of underestimating the enemy and being complacent, otherwise.

6. Avoid scheme uncertainty.

It is a particularly important taboo to make your heart feel anxious! ! ! ! !

Supplement to several principles of time difference tactics

If the debate is divided into sword faction, style and sword style, what I want to say is by no means style.

Of course, it is not a sword school on the surface, because this is only the last skill of the debate.

1.73 open rules

In other words, the last three minutes of free debate are as important as the first seven minutes.

Reason A: Because the judges scored in the last 3 minutes, the last 3 minutes were more impressive than the first 7 minutes.

B: Generally speaking, when they recall what just happened, they are more impressed by what just happened than before.

C: The last three minutes, compared with the first seven minutes. There is no chance of redemption.

D: You may have thrown away all the prepared jokes in the first seven minutes, and the need for quick wits has increased.

E: 4 You may not have enough energy to argue at this time because you have to write a defense.

So; It often happens that in many free debates, the scene is obviously dominant most of the time, but the result is lost.

2. Jordan's Law

There is a good way to deal with bulls, as long as Jordan's personal performance opportunities are increased.

If a debating team has a super excellent debater, we can calculate an account according to this assumption.

If the super player doesn't perform well, he can get 120 points, and the other three teammates each get 80 points.

The total score is 360.

What about the super player's overtaking?

He can get 150 points, but the average score is 60 points because other players lack opportunities to perform.

So the total score is 330.

This is also the reason why the debate team with super players has an advantage in the competition but lost.

Of course, if the super player scores 250 points. Everyone else is 50 points, with a total score of 400.

Even when the team with super players and the other three basically don't talk, there is no group at all.

Why did you win?

In practice, if the super player is not more than 200 points, we can use Jordan tactics.

On purpose, let the other super player speak and let him take up the time of other players.

Think about it, the seven judges each added five points to our teamwork. What is the total score?

It's a quarter! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

3, there is a little time difference tactics.

That is, pay attention to the contextual background of each time period.

For example, the attitude towards the audience is very important in the questioning stage. If the game has 10 seconds left,

Communicate emotionally with the audience, and your 1 minute speech time is equivalent to 2 minutes.

If you take 5 seconds to offend the audience and show disdain for the audience, what is your time effect when the audience asks questions 1 minute?

That is-1 minute, that is, this minute is doing negative work.

I once came across a game in which the positive lost the free debate and the negative lost in the audience's questioning stage.

The first person, who answered more arrogantly, taught the audience a lesson.

The second person, although the answer is very good, has a fierce expression.

Therefore, in the stage of audience questioning, the opposing side is in the affirmative.

In fact, we don't have to ask you to practice any posture or expression and smile with the audience. There is nothing to spend, is there?

In addition, when the audience introduces themselves, they should also pay attention to their background.

There was once a computer debater who indirectly implied that a management audience was wrong in management theory. In fact,

There is nothing wrong with that audience, but even if the audience is really wrong, we should change the expression.

On the Reconstruction of Debate

Why are fewer and fewer people watching the debate?

Why are more and more people telling the debate what to do?

Why does the debater feel good now, but the audience doesn't buy it?

Why is the current debate a boring one?

Why did I ask dozens of debaters in one breath, but they couldn't tell me what the debate was?

They always say things that they feel guilty about, such as "collision of ideas and confrontation of theories".

However, an audience came directly-"the debate is to knock down the other side." Debaters, do you think what he said is vulgar? But think about it, isn't this the result of all of you fighting on the stage? Speaking of which, you don't like listening again. Well, let's put it in a more elegant way: debate is different from debate, the difference is that debate is a means of communication, and mutual understanding is achieved through the collision of different viewpoints, while debate is to find ways to prove the correctness of one's own views and the mistakes of the other's.

Then let's think again, how to bring each other down? In other words, why did you win the game?

Several experts have said, "Be bold and sincere", "Be decisive by the wise, gentle and gentle by the benevolent, and guide the country and inspire the writing by letting go of the world and the courage of thousands of people in Qian Qian. If you have such charm, you don't need to argue. Instead of arguing, do something casually. You are just an ordinary college student. Don't expect too much from what you are playing. You know, under the normal competition system, your speech time is only 23 minutes, and everyone can only speak for a little more than 5 minutes on average. In other words, you can only say 1000 words. These more than 1000 words were also completed under the interference of the other party. There is no time for you to show your noble temperament. Save it.

Another "senior debater" said that it depends on logic, theory and skill. What is logic? Debate is never dialectical, and it is impossible for both sides to prove their views by logic, because neither of you has the truth. What is a theory? As far as I know, no one knows what the theory of debate is at present. Because it is not a subject yet, there is no theory that can help you win the game. What is a skill? Nice words are called skills? How to put it to look good? Nice chat. To whom? Your opponent won't give up just because you speak beautifully.

Speaking of this, I can only regret to say that I haven't met a debater who can tell me how to win the debate.

If no one can understand such a problem, what hope is there for the debate?

2

I don't want to oppose anything, and I don't want to raise anything. I'm just saying the status quo of the debate. As a debater, I think this situation makes me very disappointed.

Speaking of football, I think this example is very good. However, football has many purposes. For participants, it may be to exercise, to win prizes, or just to attract the attention of girls. For the audience, most of them are "concerned about the process of stimulating the results." These are all true, but this is for football, not for professional players and coaches. If they only know that football is "the collision of thoughts and the confrontation of physical strength", they don't know how to pass the ball and shoot; If they only know that football is a manifestation of teamwork, but they don't know what formation to use; If they only know that the ball is going to kick into the hole, but they don't know how to attack and defend with each other 1 1 person and 1 1 person; So can football still be like this? I don't think so.

But now the debate is like this, and the debater doesn't know how to win. They only know how to bring down their opponents, but what they can bring down and how to bring them down. They don't know. People just saw four young talents talking in Kan Kan on the stage, but they didn't know what they wanted to do. At this rate, is the debate still meaningful?

In addition, in the present situation, some people want to avoid reality and say that debate is becoming more and more popular. Look at the debate now. Let's look at the discussion on the debate on Sina-"Is the debate dead?" . I think if something is alive and well, others will not discuss whether it is dead or not.

Having said that, I still want to ask, how did you win the debate?

If there is still no answer, I think the debate is really hopeless.

three

Speaking of which, it's time to announce my answer.

It's actually quite simple. The key to winning the debate is to "convince the audience".

Are you disappointed? Are you very dissatisfied?

hahaha. When you really realize this, you can confidently say, "As long as it is a debate, as long as I am present, there is no possibility of not winning." How come? Don't you believe it?

I tell you, all debaters have made a huge mistake. They are so focused on their opponents that they forget that the audience under the stage is their parents. Will your opponent admit that you are right? No, never.

How did you win the game? With the applause of the audience and the affirmation of the judges. Judges are also a kind of audience. You should convince all the audience and them.

I think this is the starting point of the debate, which means that you and your opponent have as much time to convince the audience, and whoever makes the audience believe their views will win. If you have played enough games, you should understand me.

One more thing, persuasion does not mean catering, persuasion does not mean pleasing, and persuasion does not mean ignoring the opponent's persuasion.

Also, persuasion means persuasion by hook or by crook. Don't talk about theories and logic that the audience can't understand, don't entertain yourself, and don't denigrate other people's persuasion methods. Open to all new practices.

Listen to your audience, unite with your teammates, make those debaters who "pursue the truth" realize their emptiness, and let those debaters who think they can deceive the audience forever leave.

Please mark my words, everything starts with persuasion. Everything else is a means of persuasion.

May the glory of success light up your young face.

The specific role of sparring in the whole debate team

The school debate team must have sparring partners. So, does a college debate team need the configuration of sparring players? What role does sparring play in this team?

I lost in the debate before, but I don't want to take part in it later. As a result, a friend of the debate team asked me to be their sparring partner and half coach, so I reluctantly took it. Later, I didn't go to CCTV myself, but all my sparring partners went to CCTV-I was really happy for them.

A sparring partner must have competition experience, otherwise it is impossible to prescribe the right medicine. The most painful lesson of my previous games was that the players were not chosen properly. In fact, our team is a star team, but unfortunately everyone wants to show off and express themselves. Usually, only one person has the final say in a game. Son of the South China Sea, I also ruled a game, but all the games I ruled were narrowly won by 3: 2, and the games dominated by others became a 0: 5 fiasco.

Later, when sparring, special emphasis was placed on overall cooperation. Those who like to express themselves-although excellent-were rejected by me and another sparring partner (actually half a coach). Our school's debate team can be said to be "mud-legged" and brought out from session to session. Without any teacher's guidance, everything is self-reliant on our own strength. Finally, I am proud that I can beat a group of teams that rely on our professors to write debates and enter the CCTV finals.

Whether you are a team member or a sparring partner, it is an excellent exercise opportunity. Personal comprehensive quality has been greatly improved in the process of debate. In order to be a good sparring partner, the son of Nanhai has read many books, including books on law, economy, sports, media, philosophy and culture. Up to now, the accumulated knowledge has been of great help to my study and career. A group of partners who used to debate together now work in central government agencies, some in Singapore, some in well-known enterprises in Shenzhen, some in charge of hundreds of fund managers on Wall Street in New York, and some in the United States. The son of Nanhai is an unworthy guy here, hiding in the best climate town in the United States, writing this reply while drinking tea.

As a sparring partner, there seems to be no sense of accomplishment. Actually, it's not. Don't lose heart. If you give, you will be rewarded. Helping others is also helping yourself. Didn't the son of Nanhai just bite the bullet and read a bunch of books as a sparring partner? Otherwise, I wouldn't dare to touch that pair of thick documents at all.

How to watch the debate?

Note: it is not specifically aimed at specific observers, such as observing as a player during the game, observing as a coach, observing as a sparring partner during training, observing the opponent's game and so on. 1, resumption of trading A is a substantial resumption of trading. After a game, there must be new tactics, new experiences and new viewpoints for the contestants. You can play another game with the sparring team and experience these new things. Consciously, for the debater, there are only two states: forward and backward. The attitude of "consciously sorting out previous competition experience" determines whether the debater is in a learning state. Generally speaking, the debater in learning state is the debater in rising state. The debater who finds that he has nothing new to learn must be going downhill-again, there is no middle state! Therefore, it is understandable why some people's performance is not as good as that of the class team, …

How to evaluate this debate?

How to evaluate this debate?

(The following contents are taken from debates and arguments, with slight modifications. )

I. The role of judges in policy debates

A. find out which debate team is better.

Principle:

1. Judges must use all their knowledge of speech and debate.

The first national debate development conference in the United States pointed out:

As a judge, a judge should choose among various available methods drawn from a certain debate. Judges should pay more attention to content between content and speech, and to material between material and skill. A strong point of view on a topic should prevail, and more credible evidence should be better than a lot of evidence with poor proof.

Before the end of the debate, the judges must keep their professional knowledge on this topic. (Non-professionals intervene in the debate)

The judge must judge according to the actual situation of the debate. (Debate unprofessional intervention)

You can't replace the debater's rebuttal on the court with your own rebuttal.

The judge must take detailed notes in the debate.

B. report the evaluation results by teaching.

1. Oral comments. (1 Review the debate process, 2 give examples of speeches and strong application of debate principles, 3 put forward suggestions for improvement, 4 list the most important factors that determine the evaluation results, and 5 publish the evaluation results)

2. Evaluation form.

Ii. philosophy of judgment

A. Skills judges focus on various skills such as analysis, argumentation, evidence, organization, refutation, and speech, and carefully judge which debating team is better for each skill.

B. Debate judges pay attention to the conventional arguments in the debate.

C. Policymakers and judges use the method of legislators to evaluate two competing policy systems.

D. the hypothesis testing judge tries to determine the possible truth of a hypothesis by using scientists' methods.

E. The judges of the white paper adopt a theoretical framework that does not judge philosophy, allowing and hoping debaters to judge by debate.

There are two requirements for debaters:

1. The debater should be familiar with the debate theory.

2. Although the concept of evaluation is different, on the whole, the judges are still looking for the most reasonable evaluation model.

Phenomena that should be taboo in debate competition

1, rewinding means repeating what you think you didn't say just now, which will greatly affect the rhythm of the game and make you less confident. In the novice competition, it is easy to appear in the statement and defense: "That is to say, that is to say …" "We didn't deny abc, in fact, we forgot to say three words, so I would like to add that in fact we didn't deny abc." If this happens in the presentation, you can learn the last part of the defense by heart! Because I know that my next speech will be familiar and fluent, I will have a good attitude to deal with the slip of the tongue just now. 2, the worthless supplement is that the audience may not understand what I just said. In fact, the clearer the expression, the better, not the more words. Talk too much, don't make it clear, it will fascinate the audience. ...