Debate essay

Debate essay

 The debate can be defined as a process that allows for the discussion and argument on a given topic highlighting different ideas from different players. According to Karyl et al., a debate presents equal chances for the proponents and opponents to the question to argue out their facts and ideas and present and come up with a defense strategy to highlight their viewpoints. Debates are used in various platforms such as academic institutions, public meetings, and government proceedings, such as legislative assemblies. According to Shelly and Brouch, the debate should be focused on appealing to the emotions of the audience as well as presenting the logic consistently along with the accuracy in facts. The various groups taking part in the debate aim at highlighting strong points impacting on the superiority of the argument. The agenda of the debate determines the venue for debate. Most legislative platforms apply the indoor meeting. According to Karyl et al., debating chambers are set aside by various institutions to facilitate the proceedings of the chambers. The history of debate, the format adopted for the implementation of debates, rules governing debate sessions, and the importance of debates are covered in the paper with close reference to the available exams and platforms that employ debating attributes.

History of Debate

Debating is presented in various forms, and it is mainly based on the agenda and the cultural practices of the institutions and the main objective of the society. The history of the debate can be attributed to the traditional communities which used debates to address political issues and philosophical presentations. The traditional societies which embraced debates include Ancient Greece and India. However, transformations have then accompanied the emergence of debates with modernization during the period of enlightenment, accounting for the modern age debates as well as the establishment of the debating societies across the societies.

Since the emergence of debates from ancient society, debating societies came into existence with the early eighteenth century providing for the advent of the first debating societies in the UK in London. The rise of debate in London gave the society a new approach, and it, therefore, became an integral part of the society presented with a well-programmed fixture in debates. The debating lifer became a routine on the national activities provided under the national guidelines. In this light, the culture of London was adjusted and therefore incorporated debating in the mid-18^th century. The emergence of debating societies has influenced the development of society through the creation of platforms that critic the projects and advocate for the creation of new ideas. The early debates were coordinated by the president or the moderator who introduced the motion of the debate and regulated the flow of the discussion. The moderation is based on allowing equal opportunities to opposing sides with the time set for each individual defined. According to Shelly and Brouch, the debates were always concluded with a vote to decide on the way forward. In the case of the inconclusive discussion as per the vote obtained, a further debate was arranged. There were rules which were upheld to moderate the arguments of points of view. According to Karyl et al., insults on other speakers were disregarded, and divergence from the topic of discussion was not allowed. This was done to instill discipline and politeness in the speakers and promote unity and appreciation of diversity in ideas.

In the mid-18^th century, student debating emerged in the US with the Princeton University spearheading the culture among the US universities. The debating societies in American universities gave rise to the American Whig Society. However, the student debating platform was short-lived with the Dialectic and philanthropic debating societies which emerged in the mid-18^th century thriving till to date. In the UK, the late 18^th century was the stepping stone for the rise of the student debating societies. The early debating societies include St. Andrews and Cambridge. These existing early student debating societies rank as the world’s oldest debating societies.

The Format of a Debate

The presentation of debate takes into account a specific design that is widely accepted across the globe. The basic structure of debate entails three groups comprising of the supporting team that is the affirmative team, the opposing team, and the judges. The judges evaluate the quality of arguments presented by each side while the opposing and affirmative teams are represented by two to three members (Shelly and Brouch). In addition to the three groups, an audience may be present, making a following of the events but may not necessarily take part in the debate formally. A debate must have a specific resolution and outlined rules which guide the course of the discussion.

Fundamentals of a Debate

The debating session is governed by some set of rules which must be adhered to for efficiency and effectiveness of the debate to be attained. The rules also guide the format and the number of participants to take part in the discussion. A debate must have two sides opposing and the affirmative side with a representation of two to three speakers from each side (Shelly and Brouch). The speakers are the representation of the views of each side, and the information presented is a clear affirmation of the views of the entire team. The respective teams are accorded two to three speeches, which can either be constructive or rebuttal. The order of speeches follows a set outline in which the affirmative side gives the speech first and alternatingly allows the rebuttals to provide their account of the same.

The side worded as the proposition is expected to argue the motion affirmatively and give facts and justifiable evidence in support of the policy. However, the opposition can challenge the facts presented by the proposition with the moderation of the judge. Each team must stick to the theme of the discussion and the side, and no team is allowed to switch or revise their position in the course of the debate (Shelly and Brouch). Besides, any assertion made must be well elaborated and approved by the use of enough evidence, logic, and facts good enough to educate the uninformed person. The theme of the discussion is substantial, and each individual is expected to stick by the topic without making incomplete statements, rhetorical questions, or irrelevant comments. In addition, in the case of questioning, one is expected to present fair and precise questions that clearly guides the bearing of the discussion. He questioning period can be used to build up a case or oppose the postulates of the opposing side.

The questioning of each individual is done immediately. The speaker concludes the speech. In this case, the answers are answered without consultation from the team members. On the other hand, new constructive arguments cannot be introduced during the rebuttals. In this case, the affirmative side is expected to reply to all the negative arguments put forward before the last rebuttal. The decision of the judge on the outcome of the debate is based on the material evidence laid down by the disregarding any evidence or material that he might possess (Shelly and Brouch). Also, details obtained outside the normal procedure are not allowed in deriving the outcome of the debate.

Types of Debate

The Lincoln-Douglas Debate

This debate is a type where only two individuals are participating. The refuting and concurring opinions are placed opposite each other so that they can present their arguments while facing an audience. The Lincoln-Douglas debate receives its name from the famous debate between Lincoln and Douglas as they were running for the senate. In this debate, individuals are mainly debating on a subject that has two approaches. Due to the nature of the discussion, they are allowed enough time to research and hence come to the debate well prepared.

Having this debate allows individuals with contrasting opinions on a subject matter to defend their views effectively. Traditionally, this subject is such a controversial one as both sides have an utterly persuasive point. As was in the case of Lincoln and Douglas, the decision on whether it was right to continue with slavery or not affected not only the immediate parties but had stretching reaches to every part of the society. For a decisive conclusion to be contacted, the arguments placed by either of the participants are weighed for the most persuasive one. It is therefore fair to say, during the presentation of a Lincoln-Douglas type of debate, does not only the presentation matter but also the point presented.

The Rebuttal Debate

Most often, this form of debate is used in High schools and College levels. It is primarily designed to elaborate on the effectiveness of a group to fully explore their potential by working as a unit. The debating sides are composed of two or three members each of these members, the first presenters will put across their arguments, and the rest of the groups will be allowed a rebuttal each. The debate opens the groups to all the possible ways in which ideas could be presented as they are required to work together to achieve the presentation. During the discussion, the groups are allowed more than one rebuttal and, therefore, privileges with making the impression they want during the debate.

Here, many aspects of the debating process are put to the test. Unlike an individual who can maintain a single course throughout the debate, a group is subject to exposure of weaknesses on matters preparations and understanding of the agenda. When the group is functioning together, they are expected to maintain and affirm what their predecessor said. Similarly, the group is also tested for their eloquence and efficiency in using language. Through rebuttals, the opponents can question some of the points presented based on the way they spoke. It is, therefore, important that during such debates, the group makes all the necessary preparations to avoid being compromised.

The One Rebuttal Debate

This debate is a modification of the Lincoln-Douglas debate; however, in this case, the groups are allocated three members each. The first speaker will be the first member of the group, supporting the motion being presented. After the affirmative speaker makes his presentation, the members of the negative group are allowed to refute. The challenge continues until all the members have spoken, and the first member of the affirmative group ends the debate through an opposing rebuttal.

During this debate, several aspects of the debating ability of the members are tested. First, their ability to adequately represent themselves is put to the test. Since the presentation is only done once, the member must make sure that their point is as clear as possible. Using the given opportunity very effectively allows the member to have a significant impact on their opponents. While presenting the ideas, the participants are evaluated on their ability to defend their position in the debate efficiently. The first impression also works enormously in evaluating the competitor, since there are no second chances to speak one opportunity is to be ceased and economized. Rather than dwell on posing questions to the opponents, a participant may use the opportunity to foster their cause in the debate.

The Oregon-Oxford Debate

This debate consists of two groups, with each side supporting a different version of the motion. The groups are allocated three members who are all to work concurrently to help their team of the proposal. The debate sets off with the first member of the proposing group giving his or her claim about the motion. Upon completing his presentation, the first member of the affirmative group is asked some emerging questions by the second member of the opposing group. When the opposite side is content with the answer given, their first speaker is allowed to give his claim on the debate.

An interpellation from the supporting side follows the presentation. This approach will also continue until the members of the proposing party are satisfied. Then the second member of the affirmative team gives their claim, which is followed by an interpellation from either the first or the second speaker of the opposing group. It will also apply for any successive speakers that will follow. The first speaker of the negative side will then present his or her rebuttal after the last speaker has spoken. Eventually, the debate comes to an end with the first speaker of the supporting side, giving his or her answers.

In this debate, the moderator ensures all the steps are adequately followed, and all the members are fairly treated. He or she has the power to request one to stop their presentation or call off a heated debate over a single none progressive issue. The moderator ensures all the members are going according to the set rules without being biased to any section. The moderator ensures that at all times, individuals remain within the constraints and relevance of the debate.

This kind of debate involves several presentations and opportunities for the speakers to counter their opponents. The best approach is to device the claims in a way that the opponent is trapped between agreeing with you. Furthermore, setting the questions should be in a cunning way to allow the speakers to arrest the opponent in their weak points. During these debates, the speaker is tested extensively on their ability to not only use language but also how they effectively communicate their answers. The development of discordant questions will help the group defeat its competitors. During this debate, the ability of an individual to quickly think of a solution to a rather complicated problem will go a long way in helping the group achieve its goal.

Other Forms of Debates

Apart from the traditional way of classifying debates according to the format in which it is conducted. Debates can also be organized as a factor of who is holding the discussion. On such occasions, the members of the organizing committee will allocate a name to their debate. When developing a debate, the members will be going after some specific objectives through their forums. Such debates include:

National Debate Tournament or Team Policy Debate, this kind of discussion has a set of two debaters each and is allocated a specific time during which the debate runs. The speakers are allowed to have four occasions under which they are to present their constructive claims and another four chances for rebuttals. This type of debate is primarily designed for students in their collegiate level; however, the version intended for high school students is referred to as team policy debates.

There is also a kind of debate where the competitors are asked to take random questions and are given a few minutes to prepare. These debates are known as the spontaneous argumentation debates. Here, the motions are random, and the subject discusses it to the best of their ability during the allocated time. Since such discussions are not allowed ample time to prepare, they are mainly used to test ones’ ability to express their points well and not necessarily the eloquence of their facts on the topic. The speaker is expected to show complete control and conquer the fear of public speaking on a subject they are not fully conversant with. This debate mainly uses ideas that are almost commonly understood by the debaters.

Rules Governing Debates

Since the debate is a strictly monitored process, there are rules in which the discussion should take. For a contest to meet the standard of the discussion, there are some requirements it must achieve (Norlund 67). Whereas the debaters are individuals who may have completely contrasting opinions about a subject, there must be a way in which these differences are expressed without any fights being observed. These rules, therefore, help form the basis of valid debate.

Sides

For a debate to exist, there must be two sides to the contrasting opinions present. The members of these sides should be people who are well conversant on the topic and are willing to discuss their views in a civilized manner. Arguably, at the end of a debate, it is always a good sign when members are ready to question their stance on the opinion. Furthermore, it is the goal of the debate that opponents exist together with their rivals in a harmonious manner. Since the subjects being handled may be of such high value to the debaters, there must not always be a consensus at the end of the debate.

The Team Line

The team line is the collective agreement between the presenting groups on how the topic should be viewed. In such, the team line is the stand of the groups when it comes to the motion. The group can either be against, that is negative, or for the idea (affirmative). Once the group has fully identified their stand on a topic, their main goal is to persuade the opponents or the audience that their position is the most appropriate option (Schaffer 153). Having the team line enables the group to handle the topic without wavering between two opinions effectively. Having the baseline then becomes the main reason why the debate exists.

The Moderator

A moderator is a neutral factor in any debate. He or she does not take any sides and thus can judge them fairly. During the discussion, the moderator is tasked with several duties: with the assistance of other executives such as the timekeeper, the moderators run the debate from beginning to end. They initiate the debate through welcoming remarks and describing the nature and dilemma presented by the debate. He or she gives the debaters the subject which they debate on.

Furthermore, the moderators allocate turns between the debaters; this will ensure that the debate goes on most harmoniously. The moderators will settle any conflicts during the debate and have the power to discontinue an individual or a group for any foul behavior. They will also conclude the debate and award the marks for performances during the contest.

Rebuttals

For debate to be useful, there must be an opportunity for a reply. Through rebuttals, debaters can present the audience with some concerns and show the weaknesses of their competitors. Rebutting gives the opponents a chance to question where the point presented by the opposite side is worth taking or is feeble. Through criticism, the moderators are channeled into some of the weaknesses of the scores given by a group. Furthermore, through several rebuttals, groups are accessed to determine their understanding of the topic being discussed. When individuals are thrown a criticism, the moderators and the audience can perceive if the individual was ready or not. In the debate, the rebuttal should be clearly stated as the questioning of a point given by an opponent and not criticism of the person.

The Roles Played by Debate

The role played by a debate in modern society takes its roots from the early functions of the debate sessions. According to Karyl et al., the debate society has impacted on the increased sharing of knowledge and skills as well as creating awareness on particular topics. The emergence of debate societies across the world is used by the public to illuminate issues of national importance. However, the use of debates in the modern world has improved with a society based on the knowledge base as well as the urge to diversify accountability and different perspectives on some issues of national importance. Some of the roles played by the debates include national discussions, policy implementation by various stakeholders, academic influence, instilling confidence, skills, and knowledge. In other accounts, debates create a sense of belonging which influence the appreciation of ideological diversity among individuals. The debate sessions can also be used to define the specific characteristics of people, highlight the creativity, presentation, and implementation of ideas, program transformation, and creation of leaders.

Debates are utilized in facilitating critical national discussions. National discussions exhibit different ideological ideas that need coordination and moderation on the sharing of ideas. In this case, a forum is established to discuss a set aligned discussion topics along with the framework of presentation. The guideline to be followed is outlined, and the basic rules governing the flow of the discussion are also laid down. In this case, a created forum hints at the different ideas cutting across the participants and, therefore, aid in facilitating the different sides of the topic of discussion.

Implementation of policies comes after the decision-making process that is also influenced by debates. A forum of discussion is created, and stakeholders are given opportunities to drive their views in line with the set policy. The policy implementation is based on the agreement attained by the majority across the stakeholders. Stakeholders may have conflicting views, and under the debate format, each individual is allowed to defend their views. This aids in the sensitization and convincing the other members of the policy development team.

Academic institutions across the world employ debates in extracting information on the views of students and the general public on specific issues. Policy development and implantation requires limited resistance to attain the best outcomes. This is significant in the management of change across institutions. Change implementation is aligned by deviating from the normal ways of operation. In this case, areas of concern can be outlined through the adoption of the debate form to get a better view of the possible areas that could face resistance. This is used in learning institutions where areas of interest are pointed out, and the implementation strategy defined according to the findings of the debate. In this case, the resistance to change is reduced.

In some cases, debates are used by learning institutions to influence the learning process. The dissemination and sharing of skills and knowledge on an important fact are outlined through debate sessions, which, on the other hand, can be useful in enhancing student understanding and mastery of skills. The process can also be used to create an essential knowledge of the different perspectives of an idea. For instance, the issue of gun control has been an important issue of concern across the US over the years. In bringing about the best understanding of the argument over gun control can be outlined through the use of debate. The debate will highlight the reasons for or against gun control and, therefore, layout a strong understanding of the diversity in the arguments.

Debates also provides for the understanding of the different perspectives of individuals. This can be argued as an understanding of the characteristics of various individuals and an appreciation of the impact of diversity in society. People tend to have conflicting ideological perspectives. However, this should not be used as a mechanism of discrimination or a course of controversy among individuals with contradictory views (Shelly and Brouch). Debates create a forum of interaction in which individuals share their perspectives as well as defend their points of view. However, this is used to develop an understanding and a firm basis of appreciation of the ideological differences. Debates involve the presentation of personal opinions and ideas. In the process of the argument of ideas, personality development and character improvement are attained, especially in students. Debates serve as a basis of learning interpersonal skills and interaction approaches significant in creating better leaders.

Debates influence the process of democracy acknowledgment. Leaders and key players in democracy adoption need to be able to create, present, and evaluate ideas appropriately to derive the best meaning that influence the exercise of democracy. Peaceful coexistence among individuals with contradicting views. Democracy and commerce require a common understanding and effective decision-making process. The debate session aids in modeling individuals with effective attributes that can drive democracy and commerce for the success of the society.

The creation of leaders entails nurturing their intelligence levels, vision, efficiency, empathy, vision, and evolution towards the leadership skills required (Shelly and Brouch). The debate session acts as a nurturing ground to leaders, giving them a chance to evaluate ideas and understand the perspectives of different people and create a comforting environment that encompasses the wishes of other people. Diversity can be learned through the interactions in debating sessions. In this case, new leaders learn to interact with various people and counter their arguments respectfully and considerately.

Conclusion

Debates have existed for long, ranging from its application in the new political forums and the philosophical ideas in Ancient Greece and India. The transformation of the debating process has also undergone evolution with London making it a culture of the legislative process. The emergence of modern debates is attributed to the rise of the debating societies. London is the home of the debating societies with Princeton University coming up as the founder of student debating society. The debating societies influenced world politics with the American Whig Society, citing its origin from the student debating society. Debating session follows a specific format which is applied to all formal debating sessions. The session is guided by particular fundamentals that are adhered to in the course of the debate. Various types of debates have emerged based on the motive and the participants in the debate. The role of debate ranges from basic derivation of ideological diversities on an issue to crucial decision making and policy implementation.

Works Cited

Davis, Karyl A., et al. “An Introduction to Classroom Debate: A Tool for Educating Minds and Hearts.” Using Debate in the Classroom. Routledge, 2016. 1-10.

Johnson, Shelly, and Virginia M. Brouch. “Debate.” (2016).

Norlund, Anita. “Recognising debate types within the classroom–an expansion of prevailing conceptual divisions.” L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature 16. Running Issue (2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2016.16.01.05

Schaffer, Jonathan. “Ground rules: lessons from Wilson.” Scientific composition and metaphysical ground. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2016. 143-169. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56216-6_6

Wiesner, Claudia, Kari Palonen, and Taru Haapala. “Understanding Debate as Politics.” Debates, Rhetoric and Political Action. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2017. 1-24. doi https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57057-4_1