What is Debating

This is a brief overview for students and teachers who are new to debating. Don't worry if some of the terms are unclear; they are explained in other parts of this site.

A debate is an argument about a topic or resolution. It is conducted according to a set of rules designed to give each side a fair chance. Commonly there are two debaters in favour and two debaters against, although some styles have 3 debaters on each side and some have 2 two-person teams on each side.

A parliamentary debate is a debate that follows rules similar to those used in parliament. It also uses terms similar to thos in parliament such as the PM, the Leader of the Opposistion, and the Government. They are not in any way the current federal or provincial governments -- debaters just use those names. The rules are available at this link. 

Canadian National Debate stye is similar to parliamentary debating but simplifies the terms. The side in favour is called the Proposition and consists of the 1st Proposition speaker and the 2nd Proposition speaker. The side against is called the Opposition and consists of the 1st Opposition speaker and the 2nd Opposition speaker. In the Junior category, the speeches are normally a maximum of 6 minutes long and in the Senior category, the speeches are normally a maximum of 8 minutes long. Points of Information (i.e. standing to see if you can ask a question when the other side is speaking) are allowed. The detailed rules are available using this link.

A cross-examination or CX debate is quite different from teh other forms of debtae in Canada. The most important difference is that, at the end of their speech, each debater is questioned by one of their opponents. It uses somewhat different terms from a parliamentary debate. The side in favour is called the affirmative while the side against is called the negative, rather than government and opposition. Points of Information are not allowed in cross-ex debate. It is not often used in Canada anymore, although a version of it is very commonly used in the US. The detailed rules are available at this link.

The definition is a statement of what the resolution actually means. For example in the resolution "Hockey is the best sport", "Hockey" could mean professional hockey or amateur hockey or high school hockey, and "best" could mean most enjoyable to watch or most enjoyable to play. In order to have a good debate both sides must be arguing about the same thing, so it is essential to define the resolution. This should be done at the start of the Prime Minister’s speech. A good definition is one which defines all of the terms and which is debatable, i.e. not unreasonable or a truism (i.e. something which is obviously true). You should define in parts, i.e. break the resolution up into at least two words or groups of words and define each separately. For example in the resolution "Hockey is the best sport", you should break the phrase up into two parts, i.e. you could define "Hockey" and then " "is the best sport". You should then put the two parts together and paraphrase your definition to make it absolutely clear.

There are four keys to good delivery. The first is that you should have good eye contact, which means looking up at your audience. The second is that your voice should be effective. This means that your tone and pace should be appropriate and should vary. The third key is that you should stand straight and should not shift from foot to foot or wave a pen around. The final and most important key is that you should sound and look confident, even if you do not feel confident — you will be amazed at how many people you can fool.

If you are arguing in favour of a resolution, just ask yourself the question "Why". The answers will be your reasons. Each debater should try to have two to three reasons. You should then come up with two examples or pieces of evidence for each reason. Examples can be real or hypothetical stories that should contain a lot of detail. The detail will mean that they will be more effective and will help to make your speech longer. Evidence can be statistics, facts or quotes. You should always state the source of your evidence. Good sources include magazines, books and interviews with experts.

If you are arguing against a resolution, the process is similar to arguing in favour of the resolution but you should ask yourself "Why not" rather than "Why". When you are the opposition you do not need to prove the opposite of the resolution, although of course that would disprove the resolution. You only need to prove that the resolution is not generally true (i.e. that it is not true for some people or in some circumstances), or that the government’s reasons are not valid.

The first thing that you should do is to go back to the definition and consider what the debate is actually about. If you do this you may see that your opponents have missed some important aspect or area of the resolution. The second way to attack their argument is to attack their reasons and show that they are irrelevant or insufficient (i.e. even if true, they are not significant enough to prove the resolution) or questionable (i.e. they are not true or are unproven). You can also refute them by showing that they are outweighed by more important considerations such as cost, principles (e.g. freedom of speech, justice, equality). 

All speeches should have an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. In the introduction, you should state what the your side must prove ( if you are the 1st Proposition, you MUST define the resolution) and summarize the reasons presented by both sides so far. In the body you should first refute your opponents' arguments, as well as defending your partner's, and then explain your own. In the conclusion you should explain why your side has won, given all of the issues that have been raised -- this may involve boiling the debate down to 1-3 key issues.

In a rebuttal you are not allowed to introduce new arguments. You may only bring up arguments that have already been made by either side. This is to ensure that the person who speaks last does not have an unfair advantage. You should summarize and refute your opponents’ arguments and restate your strongest reasons, or you should point out the key issues in the debate and explain why your side has won them..