THE DEBATING GAZETTE
LAHORE SCHOOL BILINGUAL DECLAMATION
Walking toward the garden café, we heard a great deal of commotion in the distance. Thinking that a fight had broken out, fearing the worst, and looking out for people throwing kicks and punches, we ran to the scene, only to stop and stare in utter amazement. There was no crowd, no fighting and no bloodshed. All we saw there was a bunch of students, pacing up and down, practicing their declamations with great passion and vigor. So much for the catfight we were all looking forward to. Oh well, better luck next time.
GOSSIPOLOGY
This column contains anything and everything that happens on this campus, and has nothing to do with debating whatsoever. Sensitive readers must proceed with caution, and those of you can’t stomach the scandal should read no further.
Psssstt!!!!........tidbits from a conversation
Boy fistpumps girl
Boy: I like your ring
Girl: hainaaaa!! Achi hai na?
Boy: Haan buhat aalaa hai. Matching bhi hai. Nailpolish bhi achi hai but match nahin karti.
Girl: Don’t underestimate me, Meray pass her color ki matching nail polish hai *playfully hits boy*
Boy: Haan purple honi chahiye thi
Girl: Nahin yeh mauve hai.
Boy assumes the role of proposition for the motion that the nail polish is purple
Girl assumes the role of the oppoisiotn and the debate begins.
We get to see so many good things at these inter-university contests. Like look at the shirt that has fallen out from a cheap Marathi movie. Sweetheart, Govinda called he wants his floral pattern and psychedelic color shirt back.
And some people were complaining that LUMS management was better than the LSE one. Frankly, we agree with you people. We need better looking volunteers. No offence to anyone.
And who gave the delegates the chance to diss our laptops and projectors. That’s our job man. We took them out from the LSE museum to impress you all.
ADJUDICATION
An adjudicator should take the standpoint of the ‘disinterested average reasonable person’ in assessing the arguments and presentation in a debate. Thus, the adjudicator’s own opinions, specialist knowledge or tastes should not influence how they view the debate. There will usually be more than one feature distinguishing the two teams. Common distinguishing features generally correspond to the components used for marking: matter, manner and method. For example, one team may win because:
on critical issues that team presents a superior case (matter); or
whilst the two cases are of comparable strength, that team had stronger rebuttal and points of information (matter); or
the presentation of that team was more engaging and convincing (manner); or
the structure and consistency of that team, either within each speech or throughout the speeches, was superior (method).
By contrast, ‘technical’ faults are unlikely to be decisive in themselves although they may contribute to decisive considerations. For example, poor timing is a technical fault but it is usually associated with poor structure and prioritisation, which will have an impact on method. Similarly, the absence of a case statement is a technical fault but it is usually associated with looseness in the focus and clarity of arguments, which may affect matter and method.
In making a decision, adjudicators attempt to weigh up the major substantive features distinguishing the teams throughout the course of the debate. In particular, they will attempt to avoid the ‘crescendo effect’ – the effect a good third speaker can have in making a team’s argument seem much stronger than it previously appeared. Debating is a team effort and can rarely be won or lost by one team member alone.
REBUTTAL
Rebuttal is one of the most important parts of debating. It refers to the response that debaters make to the arguments of the opposing team. Different speakers should handle rebuttal slightly differently (for example, the rebuttal by a first negative should be brief enough to allow the negative to develop their own case fully, see section three – Speaker Roles – for more details). However there are some key aspects within effective rebuttal that can be identified regardless of where a person speaks within a debate.
Firstly, ‘thematic rebuttal’ is always more effective than ‘point-by-point rebuttal’. Point-by-point rebuttal refers to simply responding one by one to the arguments presented by the other side. There are a number of problems associated with this type of rebuttal. Firstly, it is very easy to miss an argument that may become important later on in the debate. Secondly, it can take a very long time to get through all of the arguments presented by the opposition, and this takes away valuable time from the team’s substantive matter.
A much more effective, fast and comprehensive approach to rebuttal is thematic rebuttal. That is, identify the major themes within the opposition’s case and attack those. In using thematic rebuttal, a speaker can also much more readily identify and address the key issues in the debate. A good analogy for rebuttal is that of a tree. The case statement and relevant themes of a case are the trunk, the arguments are the branches and the examples used are the twigs. If you wanted to knock the tree down, it makes a lot more sense to go straight for the trunk, rather than breaking off the twigs and branches. Indeed, sometimes it is appropriate to ignore the twigs and smaller branches (the examples) to give enough time for attacking the trunk and main branches (the main arguments).
For example, suppose that an affirmative team presented the following arguments for the topic ‘That physical education should be an elective’.
1. Students have a right to choose other subjects so why not physical education?
2. Students are exposed to unnecessary risk of physical injury.
3. Students can get sporting involvement outside the school in extra curricular activities.
4. There is poor funding within schools even for maths and science, let alone physical education. These other subject should have priority.
5. There is a shortage of qualified physical education teachers
Rather than responding to these arguments one by one, it is better to group them into two themes: for example the interests of the students (arguments 1, 2 and 3); and the concerns of the schools (arguments 4 and 5).
Qutoes
“When you resort to attacking the messenger and not the message, you have lost the debate.”
Addison Whithecomb quotes
“Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent, and debate.”
Hubert H. Humphrey quotes (American 38th US Vice President under Lyndon B. Johnson (1965-69) and US Senator from Minnesota (1949-64, 1971-78).1911-1978)
“Deliberation and debate is the way you stir the soul of our democracy.”
Jesse Jackson quotes (American Civil-Rights Leader, Baptist Minister and Politician, b.1941)
“Even the standard example of ancient nonsense - the debate about angels on pinheads - makes sense once you realize that theologians were not discussing whether five or eighteen would fit, but whether a pin could house a finite or an infinite number”
Stephen Jay Gould quotes
JOKES
Questions on a examination:
Art: Given one eight-count box of crayons and three sheets of notebook paper, recreate the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Skin tones should be true to life.
Biology: Create life. Estimate the differences in subsequent human culture if this form of life had developed 500 million years earlier, with special attention to its probable effect on the English Parliamentary System circa 1750. Prove your thesis.
Chemistry: You must identify a poison sample which you will find at your lab table. All necessary equipment has been provided. There are two beakers at your desk, one of which holds the antidote. If the wrong substance is used, it causes instant death. You may begin as soon as the professor injects you with a sample of the poison. (We feel this will give you an incentive to find the correct answer.)
Computer Science: Write a fifth-generation computer language. Using this language, write a computer program to finish the rest of this exam for you.
Economics: Develop a realistic plan for refinancing the national debt. Trace the possible effects of your plan in the following areas: Cubism, the Donatist Controversy and the Wave Theory of Light. Outline a method for preventing these effects. Criticize this method from all possible points of view. Point out the deficiencies in your point of view, as demonstrated in your answer to the last question.
Electrical Engineering: You will be placed in a nuclear reactor and given a partial copy of the electrical layout. The electrical system has been tampered with. You have seventeen minutes to find the problem and correct it before the reactor melts down.
Engineering: The disassembled parts of a high-powered rifle have been placed on your desk. You will also find an instruction manual, printed in Swahili. In 10 minutes, a hungry bengal tiger will be admitted to the room. Take whatever action you feel necessary. Be prepared to justify your decision.
Epistemology: Take a position for or against truth. Prove the validity of your stand.
General Knowledge: Describe in detail. Be objective and specific.
History: Describe the history of the Papacy from its origins to the present day, concentrating especially, but not exclusively, on its Europe, Asia, America and Africa. Be brief, concise and specific.
Mathematics: Derive the Euler-Cauchy equations using only a straightedge and compass. Discuss in detail the role these equations had on mathematical analysis in Europe during the 1800s.
Medicine: You have been provided with a razor blade, a piece of gauze, and a bottle of scotch. Remove your appendix. Do not suture until you work has been inspected. You have fifteen minutes.
Metaphysics: Describe in detail the probably nature of life after death. Test your hypothesis.
Music: Write a piano concerto. Orchestrate and perform it with flute and drum. You will find a piano under your seat.
Philosophy: Sketch the development of human thought. Estimate its significance. Compare with the development of any other kind of thought.
Physchology: Based on your knowledge of their works, evaluate the emotional stability, degree of adjustment, and repressed frustrations of each of the following: Alexander of Aphrodisis, Rameses II, Hammuarabi. Support your evaluation with quotations from each man's work, making appropriate references. It is not necessary to translate.
Physics: Explain the nature of matter. Include in your answer an evaluation of the impact of the development of mathematics on science.
Political Science: There is a red telephone on the desk beside you. Start World War III. Report at length on its socio-political effects if any.
Public Speaking: 2500 riot-crazed aborigines are storming the classroom. Calm them. You may use any ancient language except Latin or Greek.
Religion: Perform a miracle. Creativity will be judged.
Sociology: Estimate the sociological problems which might accompany the end of the world. Construct an experiment to test your theory.
Extra Credit: Define the universe, and give three examples.
No comments:
Post a Comment